From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Mackerras Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: ppp_generic - fix broken userspace Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 21:29:49 +1100 Message-ID: <18793.51741.28374.460500@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> References: <20090110202802.GF29349@localhost> <20090110203112.GG29349@localhost> <18793.15831.279207.252421@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20090110.233503.222465267.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: gorcunov@gmail.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, jchapman@katalix.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from ozlabs.org ([203.10.76.45]:47049 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751367AbZAKLdK (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Jan 2009 06:33:10 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20090110.233503.222465267.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: David Miller writes: > PPP was converted to use IDR instead of PPP's duplicate > implementation. > > A bug was introduced in that conversion, and that bug is being fixed > here. > > What is not to like? :-) Ah OK, that sounds all right. I was reacting to the "broken userspace" in the patch description which at first glance seemed to be saying that userspace (i.e. pppd :) is doing something which has recently been declared to be wrong and therefore it is "broken". I think "fix broken userspace" as a patch headline is quite ambiguous. Something like "Fix bug in conversion to use IDR" would be more informative. Paul.