netdev - Re: [PATCH 3/3] bonding: send ARP requests on interfaces other than the primary for tlb/alb

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4AC2F150.4060509@gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 30 Sep 2009 07:49:04 +0200
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
CC:	Jay Vosburgh <fubar@...ibm.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] bonding: send ARP requests on interfaces other than
 the primary for tlb/alb

Jarek Poplawski a écrit :
> On 30-09-2009 07:20, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> ...
>>> +	/* Choose an output channel for the ARP frame */
>>> +	tx_slave = rlb_choose_channel(skb, bond);
>>>  
>>> -		/* The ARP relpy packets must be delayed so that
>>> -		 * they can cancel out the influence of the ARP request.
>>> -		 */
>> COmments should have the following form :
>> /*
>>  * This is a fine comment
>>  */
> 
> It's "The preferred style for long (multi-line) comments [...]".

Yes I agree.

We keep old comments as they are, but for new code submission, we
try to follow common practices.
I know it seems odd, but in the end it helps code readability.

Of course, I would have not point this without another more interesting 
stuff in the review process :)


--
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