| To: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: comment about struct tcp_tw_bucket in struct sock |
| From: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 14 May 2003 21:21:17 +0200 |
| Cc: | ak@xxxxxxx, olh@xxxxxxx, marcelo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20030514.121806.41651014.davem@redhat.com> |
| References: | <20030513210541.GA4415@suse.de> <20030513.163150.28800008.davem@redhat.com> <20030514083236.GD8290@Wotan.suse.de> <20030514.121806.41651014.davem@redhat.com> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 12:18:06PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > From: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> > Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 10:32:36 +0200 > > On Tue, May 13, 2003 at 04:31:50PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > > It's documented in tcp.h already. > > Just not everybody changing sock.h also reads tcp.h :-( > > You assume that protocols in the tree are the only thing > that might break if you edit struct sock. I'm not assuming anything and didn't even edit struct sock, just pointing out that such a fragile hack as the current tw bucket is needs an explicit comment on both places. Best would be to bite the bullet and give them a common structure. -Andi |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH 2.5.69] Network packet type using RCU, David S. Miller |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: comment about struct tcp_tw_bucket in struct sock, Andi Kleen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: comment about struct tcp_tw_bucket in struct sock, David S. Miller |
| Next by Thread: | Re: comment about struct tcp_tw_bucket in struct sock, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |