On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 10:01:38AM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 01:20:23PM +0300, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > Quite a while ago I noticed that our ioctl handlers get the ioctl
> > command via u_long, but ether_ioctl()'s command argument is int.
> > This disarray
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 12:50:12PM +, Bruce M. Simpson wrote:
> Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> >Hi folks,
> >
> >Quite a while ago I noticed that our ioctl handlers get the ioctl
> >command via u_long, but ether_ioctl()'s command argument is int.
> >This disarray dates back to 1998, when ioctl functions s
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 01:20:23PM +0300, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Quite a while ago I noticed that our ioctl handlers get the ioctl
> command via u_long, but ether_ioctl()'s command argument is int.
> This disarray dates back to 1998, when ioctl functions started to
> take u_long as the
Yar Tikhiy wrote:
Hi folks,
Quite a while ago I noticed that our ioctl handlers get the ioctl
command via u_long, but ether_ioctl()'s command argument is int.
This disarray dates back to 1998, when ioctl functions started to
take u_long as the command, but ether_ioctl() was never fixed.
Fortunat
Hi folks,
Quite a while ago I noticed that our ioctl handlers get the ioctl
command via u_long, but ether_ioctl()'s command argument is int.
This disarray dates back to 1998, when ioctl functions started to
take u_long as the command, but ether_ioctl() was never fixed.
Fortunately, our ioctl comma
