[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <73f91574e34f4b92910e2afd012e16f4@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2021 13:44:45 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: 'Matthew Wilcox' <willy@...radead.org>
CC: "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
"yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org" <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
"dsahern@...nel.org" <dsahern@...nel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] udp: Switch the order of arguments to copy_linear_skb
From: Matthew Wilcox
> Sent: 11 May 2021 14:39
>
> On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 01:11:42PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> > From: Matthew Wilcox
> > > Sent: 11 May 2021 12:34
> > >
> > > All other skb functions use (off, len); this is the only one which
> > > uses (len, off). Make it consistent.
> >
> > I wouldn't change the order of the arguments without some other
> > change that ensures old code fails to compile.
> > (Like tweaking the function name.)
>
> Yes, some random essentially internal function that has had no new
> users since it was created in 2017 should get a new name *eyeroll*.
>
> Please find more useful things to critique. Or, you know, write some
> damned code yourself instead of just having opinions.
You could easily completely screw up any code that isn't committed
to the kernel source tree.
It isn't the sort of bug I'd want to diagnose.
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists