On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 12:05:45AM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > > I'm about to apply your later series, but I noticed that that one > > instead of the --fds patch, has the -E change. > > > > Do you still plan on submitting the --fds change later? > > The reason I ask is that it if we're doing --fds, then it might at some point > > mean we can deprecate (and then remove) use of -P in favor of it, so adding an > > inverse (-E) seems odd. > > Hi Dave! To be fair, not sure at moment. Initially I wanted to implement a general > --fds option which might take more complex command line like sockets:PF_X,^PF_X and > such, then extend it to file:^pipe,epoll. But this end up in being somehow > more complex rework. So I decided to stick with simplier approach first -- -E option > which would exclude some socket protocols from being generated. > > But sure, once time permit I can try to implement --fds option as well. Lets fisrt > summarize what kind of syntax it will carry. > > --fds [sockets:PF_X,^PF_X,N,^N,all,none],[files:pipe,^epoll,all,none] > > Sounds good? Sure. I just pushed out your 2nd patch set. thanks, Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe trinity" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
