netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [6/6]: jenkins hash for neigh

To: yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [6/6]: jenkins hash for neigh
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 01:30:36 -0700
Cc: laforge@xxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20040925.172712.30172597.yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20040925064406.GL3236@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040925005623.2faf8faf.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040925.171412.75484376.yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040925.172712.30172597.yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 17:27:12 +0900 (JST)
YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> In article <20040925.171412.75484376.yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (at Sat, 25 Sep 
> 2004 17:14:12 +0900 (JST)), YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 
> <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> says:
> 
> > In article <20040925005623.2faf8faf.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (at Sat, 25 Sep 
> > 2004 00:56:23 -0700), "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> says:
> > 
> > 
> > > +                 if (n->nud_state -= NUD_INCOMPLETE &&
> > 
> > I guess this is typo of:
> >                     if (n->nud_state == NUD_INCOMPLETE &&
> > 
> > Am I wrong?
> 
> Sorry, I forgot to state the source; this lives in diff4.

Good catch, you are correct.

Fixed version attached.

Attachment: diff4
Description: Binary data

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