Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Those drivers were making a incorrect assumption and should be fixed. > The in-tree drivers were fixed when this was done. If you have an out > of tree driver, then too bad for you.
I have few out-of-tree drivers (IOW not yet merged) but they aren't affected. These in the tree are (actually I was contacted by driver's author and am considering the best way to fix this). > The additional overhead of the address calculation would slow down the > well behaved drivers. There is always dev->priv. > There was discussion of alternative layouts of > the network device allocation or limiting the number of subqueue's so > that netdev_priv could be a simple addition again, but nothing came of > it. This isn't about an addition, netdev_priv() is still there. The semantics silently changed, that's it. I'm fine with its removal, is it ok? The trivial "return dev->priv" isn't worth it anyway. -- Krzysztof Halasa -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
