[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070704.033530.105423846.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 03:35:30 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: hch@...radead.org
Cc: Yinghai.Lu@....COM, shemminger@...ux-foundation.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, ak@...e.de, greg@...ah.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] net: use numa_node in net_devcice->dev instead of
parent
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 09:51:20 +0100
> On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 05:30:51PM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> > [PATCH 2/4] net: use numa_node in net_devcice->dev instead of parent
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai.lu@....com>
> > diff --git a/net/core/skbuff.c b/net/core/skbuff.c
> > index 27cfe5f..005cc1c 100644
> > --- a/net/core/skbuff.c
> > +++ b/net/core/skbuff.c
> > @@ -217,7 +217,7 @@ nodata:
> > struct sk_buff *__netdev_alloc_skb(struct net_device *dev,
> > unsigned int length, gfp_t gfp_mask)
> > {
> > - int node = dev->dev.parent ? dev_to_node(dev->dev.parent) : -1;
> > + int node = dev_to_node(&dev->dev);
>
> This looks wrong to me unless the device model has once again changed
> silently. When I wrote this code &dev->dev was a device allocated
> as part of the netdevice and the parent is the pci (or whatever) device
> that has the node information.
Correct, this change is completely bogus.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists