Re: [Elsa-devel] Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc3-mm2] connector: Add a forkconnector

[Guillaume Thouvenin]

On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 18:50 +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> >  
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_CONNECTOR) && defined(CONFIG_FORK_CONNECTOR)
> 
> I suspect CONFIG_FORK_CONNECTOR is enough.

The problem here is that if connector is compiled as a module and
fork_connector as builtin there will be undefined reference to symbol
like 'cn_already_initialized' or 'cn_netlink_send'. That's why the
fork_connector() must be enable if CONFIG_CONNECTOR and
CONFIG_FORK_CONNECTOR are selected as builtin and not as a module. I
agree that it's not very elegant...

> > +			cn_netlink_send(msg, 1);
> 
> "1" here means that this message will be delivered to any group
> which has it's first bit set(1, 3, and so on) in given socket queue.
> I suspect it is not what you want.
> By design connector's users should send messages to the group it was
> registered with
> (which is obtained from idx field of the struct cb_id), in your case it
> is CN_IDX_FORK,
> and connector userspace consumers should bind to the same group (idx
> value).
> It is of course not requirement, but a fair path(hmm, I can add more
> strict checks into connector).
> By setting 0 as second parameter for cn_netlink_send() you will force
> connector's core
> to select proper group for you.

Yes but cn_netlink_send() is looking for a callback with the same idx.
As I don't use any callback, found == 0 and I have an error "Failed to
find multicast netlink group for callback[0xfeed.0xbeef]". So the good
call is: cn_netlink_send(msg, CN_IDX_FORK);

Thanks for your help,
Guillaume

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/