From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 17:50:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 17:50:15 -0400 Received: from www.microgate.com ([216.30.46.105]:19982 "EHLO sol.microgate.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 17:50:13 -0400 Message-ID: <002f01c11eca$1db590f0$8119fea9@diemos> From: "Paul Fulghum" To: "Matt Schulkind" , , , In-Reply-To: <3810755D5165D2118F4400104B36917AC4FD34@normandy> Subject: Re: Syncppp Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 16:49:56 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > In the 2.2.16 kernel, it seems that the ppp_device structure was changed to > use a pointer to the net device instead of haveing the structure contained > within, and the if_down procedure was changed accordingly to use the sppp_of > macro. But, if I take a look at the 2.4.x kernel sources, it seems only the > first change, the pointer vs. struct change was made, but the if_down > procedure was not changed. I believe this is a bug and the if_down procedure > in the 2.4.x kernel must be changed to match 2.2.16+. Could anyone confirm > this? > -Matt Schulkind It looks like you are right. The current 2.4 code appears to scribble into the net_device structure someplace (yuck) when if_down() is called. I'm going to change this and test it tomorrow to be for sure. Paul Fulghum paulkf@microgate.com Microgate Corporation www.microgate.com