On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 02:15:04PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote:
> > ?/* A Netlink routing socket that is not subscribed to any multicast
> > groups. */
> > ?static struct nl_sock *rtnl_sock;
> > @@ -443,6 +444,14 @@ netdev_linux_init(void)
> > ? ? ? ? status = af_inet_sock >= 0 ? 0 : errno;
> > ? ? ? ? if (status) {
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? VLOG_ERR("failed to create inet socket: %s", strerror(status));
> > + ? ? ? ?} else {
> > + ? ? ? ? ? ?/* Create AF_PACKET socket. */
> > + ? ? ? ? ? ?af_packet_sock = socket(AF_PACKET, SOCK_RAW, 0);
> > + ? ? ? ? ? ?status = af_packet_sock >= 0 ? 0 : errno;
> > + ? ? ? ? ? ?if (status) {
> > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?VLOG_ERR("failed to create packet socket: %s",
> > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? strerror(status));
> > + ? ? ? ? ? ?}
> > ? ? ? ? }
>
> It's not clear to me why this is an else condition. Is it possible to
> create an af_packet_socket when an af_inet_socket fails? It seems
> like they are orthogonal.
They are orthogonal but there's no point in creating one without the
other. The overall initialization procedure fails if any part of it
fails.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
