On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 11:19:26PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote: > On Sun, Nov 25, 2007 at 04:30:03PM +0000, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > > > > > > Please look at net/ipv4/arp.c:arp_process() > > > > > > > > Am I right that CONFIG_NET_ETHERNET=n and CONFIG_NETDEV_1000=y or > > > > CONFIG_NETDEV_10000=y will not be handled correctly there? > > > > > > > > And the best solution is to nuke all #ifdef's in this function and make > > > > the code unconditionally available? > > > > > > I think removing those specific ifdefs in arp_process() > > > is the best option, yes. > > > > Patch below. > > Thanks Adrian. Patch applied to net-2.6. > > Do we need this for stable too?
Unless I'm misunderstanding the code we currently wrongly ignore some ARP packages based on the setting of an unrelated option, so it seems to be a -stable candidate when it's in Linus' tree. > Chers, cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed - 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