From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Graf Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipv4: devconf: start IPV4_DEVCONF_* from 0 Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 05:02:24 -0500 Message-ID: <20110113100224.GB30432@canuck.infradead.org> References: <20110112.184734.38051229.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org, kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, pekkas@netcore.fi, jmorris@namei.org, yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, kaber@trash.net, opurdila@ixiacom.com, ddvlad@rosedu.org To: Lucian Adrian Grijincu Return-path: Received: from canuck.infradead.org ([134.117.69.58]:43454 "EHLO canuck.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752749Ab1AMKCc (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Jan 2011 05:02:32 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 09:50:14AM +0200, Lucian Adrian Grijincu wrote: > Yes it works, but there does not seem to be a good reason why to > complicate things like this (again the sentinel nature of zero is not > used in any place here). The reason I didn't change anything was the same as Dave's reply, I thought it must have been done on purpose. It probably was but I can't spot any reason now either. Also, IPv6 is doing just fine with using '0' as its first devconf id. I have no objects to changing this at all but we don't gain much either.