From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Morris Subject: Re: compat_sock_common_getsockopt typo? Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 09:43:05 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: References: <1173137211.15891.27.camel@johannes.berg> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: netdev To: Johannes Berg Return-path: Received: from mail8.sea5.speakeasy.net ([69.17.117.10]:54694 "EHLO mail8.sea5.speakeasy.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965883AbXCFOnI (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Mar 2007 09:43:08 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1173137211.15891.27.camel@johannes.berg> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Tue, 6 Mar 2007, Johannes Berg wrote: > The function reads as follows: > > int compat_sock_common_getsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname, > char __user *optval, int __user *optlen) > { > struct sock *sk = sock->sk; > > if (sk->sk_prot->compat_setsockopt != NULL) > ^^^ > > return sk->sk_prot->compat_getsockopt(sk, level, optname, > ^^^ > optval, optlen); > return sk->sk_prot->getsockopt(sk, level, optname, optval, optlen); > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL(compat_sock_common_getsockopt); > > Is that intentional to make protocol writers assign both if they want > compat_setsockopt? :P It's a bug. -- James Morris