From: Thomas Graf <[email protected]> Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 14:42:18 +0000
> On 03/21/13 at 06:18pm, Andrey Vagin wrote: >> Follow the common pattern and define *_DIAG_MAX like: >> >> [...] >> __XXX_DIAG_MAX, >> }; >> >> Because everyone is used to do: >> >> struct nlattr *attrs[XXX_DIAG_MAX+1]; >> >> nla_parse([...], XXX_DIAG_MAX, [...] >> >> Reported-by: Thomas Graf <[email protected]> >> Cc: "David S. Miller" <[email protected]> >> Cc: Pavel Emelyanov <[email protected]> >> Cc: Eric Dumazet <[email protected]> >> Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <[email protected]> >> Cc: David Howells <[email protected]> >> Signed-off-by: Andrey Vagin <[email protected]> > > Acked-by: Thomas Graf <[email protected]> So you're ACK'ing a patch that makes changes to files that don't even exist in the repository? Andrey, post a clean patch against 'net' that fixes these constants for existing code, don't just assume that your original patch set is applied and post changes relative to that. That's not how we work. After the bug fix for the existing cases goes in, you have to repost your original patch set on top of that. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
