Messages in this thread | | | From | Brian Moyle <> | Subject | RE: [PATCH] linux/net/ipv4/arp.c, kernel 2.0.36 (& 2.0.37-pre9) | Date | Mon, 29 Mar 1999 15:28:42 -0800 |
| |
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=US-ASCII"> <META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2448.0"> <TITLE>RE: [PATCH] linux/net/ipv4/arp.c, kernel 2.0.36 (& 2.0.37-pre9)</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY>
<P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">Are there any "official" sites for posting patches like this (i.e., patches that don't make it into the main kernel)? It might help others avoid working on previously-solved problems, as well as help those who know little about kernel hacking.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">Brian</FONT> </P> <UL> <P><FONT SIZE=1 FACE="MS Sans Serif">----------</FONT> <BR><B><FONT SIZE=1 FACE="MS Sans Serif">From:</FONT></B> <FONT SIZE=1 FACE="MS Sans Serif">alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk[SMTP:alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk]</FONT> <BR><B><FONT SIZE=1 FACE="MS Sans Serif">Sent:</FONT></B> <FONT SIZE=1 FACE="MS Sans Serif">Monday, March 29, 1999 1:25 PM</FONT> <BR><B><FONT SIZE=1 FACE="MS Sans Serif">To:</FONT></B> <FONT SIZE=1 FACE="MS Sans Serif">pavel@bug.ucw.cz</FONT> <BR><B><FONT SIZE=1 FACE="MS Sans Serif">Cc:</FONT></B> <FONT SIZE=1 FACE="MS Sans Serif">alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk; bmoyle@redcreek.com; linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu</FONT> <BR><B><FONT SIZE=1 FACE="MS Sans Serif">Subject:</FONT></B> <FONT SIZE=1 FACE="MS Sans Serif">Re: [PATCH] linux/net/ipv4/arp.c, kernel 2.0.36 (& 2.0.37-pre9)</FONT> </P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">> > The kernel knows perfectly well that its silly to send packets to yourself </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">> > via external interfaces. This patch isn't needed. The bug is your routing</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">> > table and trying to set up this configuration.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">> Alan, this bitten me long time ago, too. External loopback is very</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">> nice for testing...</FONT> </P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">There are two reasons Im not putting this in</FONT> </P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">1. Its a very specialised need. The patch is fine if you need it add it - its</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">more specialised than other "not needed" patches people keep out of the</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">main tree. </FONT> </P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">2. Its on a common code path. Sum the number of times that path is taken</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">by the number of users of Linux versus the 3 or 4 who actually need it.</FONT> </P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">There isnt anything wrong with the patch, its just not relevant to the</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">userbase as a whole and its on a regularly executed path</FONT> </P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">Alan</FONT> </P> </UL> </BODY> </HTML> | |