[PATCH] drivers/net: fix comparisons of unsigned < 0

Recent gcc versions emit warnings when unsigned variables are compared < 0 or >= 0. Signed-off-by: Bill Nottingham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- mlx4/qp.c |3 +-- netxen/netxen_nic_niu.c |6 +++--- tulip/de2104x.c |1 - 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+),

[PATCH] net: fix comparisons of unsigned < 0

Recent gcc versions emit warnings when unsigned variables are compared < 0 or >= 0. Signed-off-by: Bill Nottingham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- 8021q/vlan.c |3 +-- dccp/probe.c |2 +- ipv6/netfilter/nf_conntrack_l3

Re: bonding: cannot remove certain named devices

David Miller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said: > From: Xavier Bestel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 09:29:43 +0200 > > > Why not simply retricting chars to isalnum() ones ? > > As Bill said that would block things like "-" and "_" which are fine. > > Bill also mentioned something about "b

Re: bonding: cannot remove certain named devices

Xavier Bestel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said: > > I think it's sane to avoid control characters and unicode/iso*, since they > > can interfere with log output or analysis. I only thought about the kernel > > itself and the corresponding userspace tools, which should handle any > > character sequence jus

Re: bonding: cannot remove certain named devices

Giacomo A. Catenazzi ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said: > > Are you willing to work to add the special case code necessary to > > handle whitespace characters in the device name over all of the kernel > > code and also all of the userland tools too? > > But if you don't handle spaces in userspace, you han

Re: bonding: cannot remove certain named devices

Stephen Hemminger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said: > > They're certainly allowed, and the sysfs directory structure, files, > > etc. handle it ok. Userspace tends to break in a variety of ways. > > > > I believe the only invalid character in an interface name is '/'. > > > > The names "." and ".." are

Re: bonding: cannot remove certain named devices

Mitch Williams ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said: > Are spaces allowed in interface names anyway? I can't believe that > bonding is the only area affected by this. They're certainly allowed, and the sysfs directory structure, files, etc. handle it ok. Userspace tends to break in a variety of ways. I bel

bonding: cannot remove certain named devices

2.6.17-rc4+. Trivial example: # modprobe bonding (creates bond0) # ip link set bond0 name "a b" # echo "-a b" > /sys/class/net/bonding_masters bonding: unable to delete non-existent bond a bash: echo: write error: No such device Bill - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe n

lockdep: adding bonding device triggers warning

2.6.17-1.2564.fc6 is 2.6.18rc4+. Happened with 'echo "+bond0" > /sys/class/net/bonding_masters' bonding: bond0 is being created... === [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ] 2.6.17-1.2564.fc6 #1

Re: pcnet32 devices with incorrect trident vendor ID

Bill Nottingham ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said: > I remember looking at this a while back. I think the corrected information > is only being propagated to the 'vendor' file, and the write_config_word > isn't actually updating the 'config' entry in sysfs. Ah, here&#x

Re: pcnet32 devices with incorrect trident vendor ID

Matthew Wilcox ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said: > On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 01:57:14PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 08:49:42PM +, Daniel Drake wrote: > > > interesting: > > > > > > http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-420013-highlight-trident.html > > > > > > The user saw