From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ulrich Drepper Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/18] flag parameters: check magic constants Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 21:21:29 -0700 Message-ID: <48291749.1060400@redhat.com> References: <200805062118.m46LI74j004096@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20080512201341.9ead6a9a.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <482910FA.1080703@redhat.com> <20080512.210225.167924945.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, davidel@xmailserver.org, mtk.manpages@gmail.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:51932 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753332AbYEMEVn (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 May 2008 00:21:43 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080512.210225.167924945.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 David Miller wrote: > You'll need to handle MIPS and PARISC as well, as they have > similar conflicts. Is MIPS really a problem? The value is 0x80. 128 protocol types shoul= d be enough. Even if not, there is no reason why the numbers should be consecutive. It's easy enough to skip over a bit. I.e., after procoto= l 0x7f the next one would be 0x100. And PA seems to have gotten O_NONBLOCK wrong. SPARC does it right AFAI= CS. - -- =E2=9E=A7 Ulrich Drepper =E2=9E=A7 Red Hat, Inc. =E2=9E=A7 444 Castro S= t =E2=9E=A7 Mountain View, CA =E2=9D=96 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFIKRdJ2ijCOnn/RHQRAovKAKDFz2ZJ0E2XYVu5Qn8fME+ieZZopwCgmH4D ldfvNrhK8LdvjZzNPViILV0=3D =3DZ9Dj -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----