| To: | jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 2.5.70+] tun using alloc_netdev |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 11 Jun 2003 20:57:21 -0700 (PDT) |
| Cc: | maxk@xxxxxxxxxxxx, shemminger@xxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20030611194317.GE31051@xxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20030609115857.38bb31d6.shemminger@xxxxxxxx> <5.1.0.14.2.20030611121155.0b659e20@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20030611194317.GE31051@xxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 15:43:18 -0400 On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 12:21:44PM -0700, Max Krasnyansky wrote: > This is wrong. register_netdevice() does not expand name (ie %d stuff). > So dev_alloc_name() is still needed. i.e. Correct. But, register_netdev() is preferred precisely for this reason. Right. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: gettime: Was (Re: Route cache performance under stress, David S. Miller |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH 2.5.70+] tun using alloc_netdev, David S. Miller |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 2.5.70+] tun using alloc_netdev, David S. Miller |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 2.5.70+] tun using alloc_netdev, David S. Miller |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |