Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] ipmr: add netlink notifications on igmpmsg cache reports

On 06/14/2017 12:56 AM, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:

Le 13/06/2017 à 19:08, Julien Gomes a écrit :

quoted

Add Netlink notifications on cache reports in ipmr, in addition to the
existing igmpmsg sent to mroute_sk.
Send RTM_NEWCACHEREPORT notifications to RTNLGRP_IPV4_MROUTE.

MSGTYPE, VIF_ID, SRC_ADDR and DST_ADDR Netlink attributes contain the
same data as their equivalent fields in the igmpmsg header.
PKT attribute is the packet sent to mroute_sk, without the added igmpmsg
header.

Suggested-by: Ryan Halbrook <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Julien Gomes <redacted>
---
 include/uapi/linux/mroute.h | 11 ++++++++
 net/ipv4/ipmr.c             | 63 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
 2 files changed, 72 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/mroute.h b/include/uapi/linux/mroute.h
index f904367c0cee..f6f9e01ee734 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/mroute.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/mroute.h

@@ -152,6 +152,17 @@ enum {
 };
 #define IPMRA_VIFA_MAX (__IPMRA_VIFA_MAX - 1)
 
+/* ipmr netlink cache report attributes */
+enum {

IPMRA_CACHEREPORTA_UNSPEC is missing.

Indeed, I will add it.

By the way, maybe something shorter than IPMRA_CACHEREPORTA_ would be better.
What about IPMR_CREPORTA_? IPMR_CACHEA_? IPMR_IGMPA_? or whatever.

I see absolutely no issue in shortening them.
IPMRA_CREPORT_ sounds good to me.

What is the signification of the two 'A'? One for 'attribute', but the other?

Now that you mention it, the second 'A' is simply redundant.
I will remove it and go with IPMRA_CREPORT_.

-- 
Julien Gomes