Advice on first patch

[Matthew Walster]

On 2 October 2012 12:29, Bjørn Mork <bjorn at mork.no> wrote:

> matthew at walster.org writes:
>
> > I'm hopefully going to be submitting the attached patch to the
> > mainline kernel tree, and as it's my first patch, I figured it would
> > be wise to run it past KN first in case I'd done something
> > monumentally stupid! I found it through a checkpatch run, from the
> > excellent talk by GregKH at FOSDEM a year or so back.
> >
> > Any input would be greatly appreciated!
>
> Looks fine to me, but you might want to remove/update the related
> comment as well:
>
>         /*
>          *      This ALLMULTI check should be redundant by 1.4
>          *      so don't forget to remove it.
>          *
>          *      Seems, you forgot to remove it. All silly devices
>          *      seems to set IFF_PROMISC.
>          */
>
>         else if (1 /*dev->flags&IFF_PROMISC */ ) {
>                 if (unlikely(!ether_addr_equal_64bits(eth->h_dest,
>                                                       dev->dev_addr)))
>                         skb->pkt_type = PACKET_OTHERHOST;
>         }
>
>
>
> Looks like someone was expecting a 1.4 at the time.  We know better now
> :-)
>

Thanks, marvellous ;)

Matthew Walster
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/attachments/20121002/882cb4da/attachment-0001.html