From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sctp: SCTP_SOCKOPT_PEELOFF return socket pointer for kernel users Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 16:05:27 -0300 Message-ID: <55A40BF7.7060803@gmail.com> References: <4dfd0ee7ac0aac0791812217e990e2ae7ff86955.1434645734.git.marcelo.leitner@gmail.com> <20150710.182114.1532697560595947999.davem@davemloft.net> <20150713103911.GA9631@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <20150713.115912.324798425601463403.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, vyasevich@gmail.com To: David Miller , nhorman@tuxdriver.com Return-path: Received: from mail-qk0-f171.google.com ([209.85.220.171]:34734 "EHLO mail-qk0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751866AbbGMTFe (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Jul 2015 15:05:34 -0400 Received: by qkcl188 with SMTP id l188so77801588qkc.1 for ; Mon, 13 Jul 2015 12:05:33 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20150713.115912.324798425601463403.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 13-07-2015 15:59, David Miller wrote: > From: Neil Horman > Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 06:39:11 -0400 > >> Initially Marcelo had created duplicate code paths, one to return an >> fd, one to return a file struct. If you would rather go in that >> direction, I'm sure he can propose it again, but that seems less >> correct to me than this solution. > > That's much better. I'm not sure what you mean. Is the new option better or the history/description? Marcelo