Subject: Re: [Patch 9/9] Generic netlink interface for delay accounting

From: Shailabh Nagar <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 23:18:06 -0500

jamal wrote:

>On Mon, 2006-13-03 at 18:33 -0800, Matt Helsley wrote:
>  
>
>>On Mon, 2006-03-13 at 19:56 -0500, Shailabh Nagar wrote:
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>Jamal, was your Mon, 13 Mar 2006 21:29:09 -0500 reply:
>>    
>>
>>>Note, you are still not following the standard scheme of doing things.
>>>Example: using command = GET and the message carrying the TGID to note
>>>which TGID is of interest. Instead you have command = TGID.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>
>  
>
>>meant to suggest that TASKSTATS_CMD_(P|TG)ID should be renamed to
>>TASKSTATS_CMD_GET_(P|TG)ID ? Is that sufficient? Or am I
>>misunderstanding?
>>
>>    
>>
>
>I had a long description in an earlier email feedback; but the summary
>of it is the GET command is generic like TASKSTATS_CMD_GET; the message
>itself carries TLVs of what needs to be gotten which are 
>either PID and/or TGID etc. Anyways, theres a long spill of what i am
>saying in that earlier email. Perhaps the current patch is a transition
>towards that?
>  
>

Yes, the comments you'd made in the previous mail have not been
incorporated and this is still the older version of the patch.
We'd been avoiding TLV usage so far :-)

>cheers,
>jamal