[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1493920071.22125.37.camel@perches.com>
Date: Thu, 04 May 2017 10:47:51 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, garsilva@...eddedor.com
Cc: kuznet@....inr.ac.ru, jmorris@...ei.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org,
kaber@...sh.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-ipv4] question about arguments position
On Thu, 2017-05-04 at 12:46 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@...eddedor.com>
> Date: Thu, 04 May 2017 11:07:54 -0500
>
> > While looking into Coverity ID 1357474 I ran into the following piece
> > of code at net/ipv4/inet_diag.c:392:
>
> Because it's been this way since at least 2005, it doesn't matter if
> the order is correct or not. What's there is the locked in behavior
> exposed to userspace and changing it will break things for people.
Adding a few comments around the code about why
it is this way will help avoid future questions.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists