[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1263254625.29868.4777.camel@calx>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 18:03:45 -0600
From: Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: danborkmann@...glemail.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
jmoyer@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, netdev@....sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] netpoll: allow execution of multiple rx_hooks per
interface
On Mon, 2010-01-11 at 15:59 -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
> Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 17:21:48 -0600
>
> > Looks pretty good. Dave?
> >
> > Acked-by: Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
>
> I don't like the loop for RX ARP processing.
>
> The packet contents aren't going to change, so doing basic
> packet validation inside of the "for each RX client" loop
> of arp_reply() doesn't make any sense.
True. Dan, please help our poor compilers with some manual loop
invariant motion.
--
http://selenic.com : development and support for Mercurial and Linux
--
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