Actually, I'm backing this one out, it creates new warnings because callers of this function pass in a "const" pointer.
Yes, it now seems it's not so simple. Marking it non-const there would mark the it non-const in the whole family of sctp_state_fn_t and I'm not sure that's the best thing to do. I guess the maintainer has better bases for deciding what to do about it.
-- Meelis Roos ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
