Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] Fix error report from nl_recvmsg
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Eric Blake <eblake(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 03/01/2013 03:18 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>>
>> So the conclusion is that I see no extra harm in calling nl_geterror(). ACK.
>
> Except the API signature is different, so my patch won't work with
> both versions :-(
Sounds like its time for a wrapper function that #ifdefs away the
difference in underlying API calls between libnl1 and libnl3, with the
bulk of our code using our wrapper instead of direct nl_* functions.
And by the time we convert our code to all go through our wrappers, how
much simpler is it to have our wrapper do the direct socket work instead
of catering to two parallel nl_ abstractions?
--
Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
This is the same road I went down with for an application at work. By
the time I got close to abstracting away all the badness, I had a
working netlink layer and dropped libnl entirely. I wasn't using all
the complex gennl types that libnl contains and abstracts however. A
reasonable read is libnfnetlink to see how really simple it is to use
netlink.
https://git.netfilter.org/libnfnetlink/
--
Doug Goldstein