On Jan 29 2008 20:48, Pavel Roskin wrote: >On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 19:20 -0500, Jon Masters wrote: > >> Yes it is. But I thought the existing code was intending to taint the >> kernel (that's what it does), so it would really help to identify why it >> tainted the kernel, by calling add_taint_module instead of add_taint. I >> didn't put the existing match in there...don't shoot the messenger :) > >So, it's the same thing as in year 2006. Good intentions, unexpected >side effects, and a long discussion.
Perhaps module.c needs more comments explaining why the ndis line is there, and why it's correct and noone should touch it. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
