| To: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] kfree_skb() bug in 2.4.22 |
| From: | Ingo Oeser <ioe-lkml@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 10 Oct 2003 14:53:44 +0200 |
| Cc: | toby@xxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, coreteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, netfilter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, akpm@xxxxxxxxxx, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, pekkas@xxxxxxxxxx, jmorris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <20031008064735.7373227b.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <1065617075.1514.29.camel@localhost> <3F840C9C.9050704@xxxxxxxxx> <20031008064735.7373227b.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | KMail/1.5.4 |
On Wednesday 08 October 2003 15:47, David S. Miller wrote: > On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 09:09:48 -0400 > > Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I would prefer that you fix your code instead, to not pass NULL to > > kfree_skb()... > > Absolutely, there is no valid reason to pass NULL into these > routines. Would you mind __attribute_nonnull__ for these functions, if we enable GCC 3.3 support for this[1]? [1] Which includes editing the compiler.h and gcc3-compiler.h and so on. Regards Ingo Oeser |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] (resend) fix sock_raw behaviour, David S. Miller |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH] kfree_skb() bug in 2.4.22, David S. Miller |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] kfree_skb() bug in 2.4.22, David S. Miller |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] kfree_skb() bug in 2.4.22, David S. Miller |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |