From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261862AbULGRee (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Dec 2004 12:34:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261869AbULGReL (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Dec 2004 12:34:11 -0500 Received: from yue.linux-ipv6.org ([203.178.140.15]:35854 "EHLO yue.st-paulia.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261862AbULGRd7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Dec 2004 12:33:59 -0500 Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 02:35:30 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <20041208.023530.26430801.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> To: mitch@sfgoth.com Cc: kernel@linuxace.com, davem@davemloft.net, shemminger@osdl.org, linux-net@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com, yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix select() for SOCK_RAW sockets From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / =?iso-2022-jp?B?GyRCNUhGIzFRTEAbKEI=?= In-Reply-To: <20041207150834.GA75700@gaz.sfgoth.com> References: <20041207045302.GA23746@linuxace.com> <20041207054840.GD61527@gaz.sfgoth.com> <20041207150834.GA75700@gaz.sfgoth.com> Organization: USAGI Project X-URL: http://www.yoshifuji.org/%7Ehideaki/ X-Fingerprint: 9022 65EB 1ECF 3AD1 0BDF 80D8 4807 F894 E062 0EEA X-PGP-Key-URL: http://www.yoshifuji.org/%7Ehideaki/hideaki@yoshifuji.org.asc X-Face: "5$Al-.M>NJ%a'@hhZdQm:."qn~PA^gq4o*>iCFToq*bAi#4FRtx}enhuQKz7fNqQz\BYU] $~O_5m-9'}MIs`XGwIEscw;e5b>n"B_?j/AkL~i/MEaZBLP X-Mailer: Mew version 2.2 on Emacs 20.7 / Mule 4.1 (AOI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In article <20041207150834.GA75700@gaz.sfgoth.com> (at Tue, 7 Dec 2004 07:08:34 -0800), Mitchell Blank Jr says: > Phil: Here's a real patch for you to test. I actually left inet_dgram_ops > alone since it's an exported symbol (two of the users just want the .do_ioctl > value which is the same between SOCK_DGRAM and SOCK_RAW; the other is ipv6 > where it's clearly dealing with a UDP socket -- therefore I think its safest > to leave inet_dgram_ops to have the UDP behavior) Probably, we need to do the same for ipv6, don't we? --yoshfuji