[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] fix select() for SOCK_RAW sockets

To: mitch@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix select() for SOCK_RAW sockets
From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 02:35:30 +0900 (JST)
Cc: kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxx, davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, shemminger@xxxxxxxx, linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20041207150834.GA75700@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization: USAGI Project
References: <20041207045302.GA23746@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20041207054840.GD61527@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20041207150834.GA75700@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
In article <20041207150834.GA75700@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (at Tue, 7 Dec 2004 07:08:34 
-0800), Mitchell Blank Jr <mitch@xxxxxxxxxx> says:

> Phil: Here's a real patch for you to test.  I actually left inet_dgram_ops
> alone since it's an exported symbol (two of the users just want the .do_ioctl
> value which is the same between SOCK_DGRAM and SOCK_RAW; the other is ipv6
> where it's clearly dealing with a UDP socket -- therefore I think its safest
> to leave inet_dgram_ops to have the UDP behavior)

Probably, we need to do the same for ipv6, don't we?


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>