[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1257701045.29123.288.camel@pohly-mobl1.ikn.intel.com>
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2009 18:24:05 +0100
From: Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly@...el.com>
To: Ali Gholami Rudi <ali@...i.ir>
Cc: "trivial@...nel.org" <trivial@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] trivial: fix checking socket() in net tstamp example
On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 15:59 +0000, Ali Gholami Rudi wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Ali Gholami Rudi <ali@...i.ir>
> ---
> .../networking/timestamping/timestamping.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/networking/timestamping/timestamping.c b/Documentation/networking/timestamping/timestamping.c
> index a7936fe..bab619a 100644
> --- a/Documentation/networking/timestamping/timestamping.c
> +++ b/Documentation/networking/timestamping/timestamping.c
> @@ -370,7 +370,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
> }
>
> sock = socket(PF_INET, SOCK_DGRAM, IPPROTO_UDP);
> - if (socket < 0)
> + if (sock < 0)
Argh, of course you are right. FWIW, acknowledged.
--
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly
The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists