From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Girish Moodalbail Subject: [PATCH net] net: fix incorrect comment with regard to VLAN packet handling Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2017 11:32:11 -0800 Message-ID: <1510083131-3600-1-git-send-email-girish.moodalbail@oracle.com> To: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net Return-path: Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:36019 "EHLO userp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753069AbdKGT4a (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Nov 2017 14:56:30 -0500 Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: The commit bcc6d4790361 ("net: vlan: make non-hw-accel rx path similar to hw-accel") unified accel and non-accel path for VLAN RX. With that fix we do not register any packet_type handler for VLANs anymore, so fix the incorrect comment. Signed-off-by: Girish Moodalbail --- include/linux/netdevice.h | 8 -------- 1 file changed, 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/linux/netdevice.h b/include/linux/netdevice.h index 2eaac7d..7098978 100644 --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h @@ -4411,15 +4411,7 @@ void netdev_printk(const char *level, const struct net_device *dev, * Why 16. Because with 16 the only overlap we get on a hash of the * low nibble of the protocol value is RARP/SNAP/X.25. * - * NOTE: That is no longer true with the addition of VLAN tags. Not - * sure which should go first, but I bet it won't make much - * difference if we are running VLANs. The good news is that - * this protocol won't be in the list unless compiled in, so - * the average user (w/out VLANs) will not be adversely affected. - * --BLG - * * 0800 IP - * 8100 802.1Q VLAN * 0001 802.3 * 0002 AX.25 * 0004 802.2 -- 1.8.3.1