Re: [net-ipv4] question about arguments position

From	Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [net-ipv4] question about arguments position
Date	2017-05-04 21:20 +0200
Message-ID	<tDus9-7Mu-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	(1 earlier) <tDs70-67i-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <tDt33-6JH-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <tDuit-7H9-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <tDuit-7H9-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <tDus9-7Mu-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Thu, 2017-05-04 at 14:15 -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> Quoting Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>:
> 
> > On Thu, 2017-05-04 at 14:00 -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> > > Regarding the code comments, what about the following patch:
> > 
> > []
> > > diff --git a/net/ipv4/inet_diag.c b/net/ipv4/inet_diag.c
> > 
> > []
> > > @@ -389,6 +389,12 @@ static int sk_diag_fill(struct sock *sk, struct
> > > sk_buff *skb,
> > >                                    nlmsg_flags, unlh, net_admin);
> > >   }
> > > 
> > > +/*
> > > + * Ignore the position of the arguments req->id.idiag_dport and
> > > + * req->id.idiag_sport in both calls to inet_lookup() and inet6_lookup()
> > > + * functions, once this is a locked in behavior exposed to user space.
> > > + * Changing this will break things for people.
> > > + */
> > >   struct sock *inet_diag_find_one_icsk(struct net *net,
> > >                                       struct inet_hashinfo *hashinfo,
> > >                                       const struct inet_diag_req_v2 *req)
> > > 
> > 
> > Seems sensible.  Thanks.
> 
> Should I resend it in a full and proper format or it can taken from here?

If you want it applied, it should be resent as a full patch
with your sign-off.

Thread

[net-ipv4] question about arguments position "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@embeddedor.com> - 2017-05-04 18:10 +0200
  Re: [net-ipv4] question about arguments position David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> - 2017-05-04 18:50 +0200
    Re: [net-ipv4] question about arguments position Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2017-05-04 19:50 +0200
      Re: [net-ipv4] question about arguments position Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2017-05-04 21:10 +0200
        Re: [net-ipv4] question about arguments position Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2017-05-04 21:20 +0200
          Re: [net-ipv4] question about arguments position "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@embeddedor.com> - 2017-05-04 21:30 +0200
            [PATCH] net: ipv4: add code comment for clarification "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@embeddedor.com> - 2017-05-04 22:10 +0200
              Re: [PATCH] net: ipv4: add code comment for clarification David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> - 2017-05-08 17:40 +0200
                Re: [PATCH] net: ipv4: add code comment for clarification "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@embeddedor.com> - 2017-05-08 18:10 +0200
        Re: [net-ipv4] question about arguments position "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@embeddedor.com> - 2017-05-04 21:20 +0200
      Re: [net-ipv4] question about arguments position "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@embeddedor.com> - 2017-05-04 21:50 +0200
    Re: [net-ipv4] question about arguments position "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@embeddedor.com> - 2017-05-04 20:00 +0200

csiph-web