Re: [net-ipv4] question about arguments position

From	"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@embeddedor.com>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [net-ipv4] question about arguments position
Date	2017-05-04 21:20 +0200
Message-ID	<tDus9-7Mu-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<tDrui-5So-19@gated-at.bofh.it> <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>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

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?

Thanks
--
Gustavo A. R. Silva

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