[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <490E642F.8080509@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2008 10:38:39 +0800
From: Wei Yongjun <yjwei@...fujitsu.com>
To: Philip Craig <philipc@...pgear.com>
CC: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] udp: Fix the SNMP counter of UDP_MIB_INDATAGRAMS
Philip Craig wrote:
> David Miller wrote:
>
>> From: Wei Yongjun <yjwei@...fujitsu.com>
>> Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2008 17:08:55 +0800
>>
>>
>>> @@ -158,6 +159,8 @@ try_again:
>>> else if (copied < ulen)
>>> msg->msg_flags |= MSG_TRUNC;
>>> + is_udp4 = (skb->protocol == htons(ETH_P_IP));
>>> +
>>> /*
>>> * If checksum is needed at all, try to do it while copying the
>>> * data. If the data is truncated, or if we only want a partial
>>>
>> ...
>>
>>> sock_recv_timestamp(msg, sk, skb);
>>> @@ -196,7 +204,7 @@ try_again:
>>> sin6->sin6_flowinfo = 0;
>>> sin6->sin6_scope_id = 0;
>>> - if (skb->protocol == htons(ETH_P_IP))
>>> + if (is_udp4)
>>> ipv6_addr_set(&sin6->sin6_addr, 0, 0,
>>>
>> This patch is corrupted in ways I thought I would never see in my
>> entire life. Congratulations!
>>
>
> The patch looked okay to me, but judging by the bits you quoted,
> the format=flowed is causing the problem.
>
It is also ok at http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/6776/ and
http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=122553080530450&w=2, maybe the mail
client's action is strange. Anyway I have resent them, maybe this time
it is not corrupted.^_^
--
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