On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 04:10:08PM +0300, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>
> I'm afraid to become importunate, but is the net-2.6 (not 25)
> tree is currently the David's tree (unlike net-2.6.25, which
> has temporary switched to your one)?
I'm about to do a push soon which will create net-2.6 in the
same
Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 22, 2007 at 04:22:30PM +0300, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>> The first_unix_socket() and next_unix_sockets() are now used
>> in proc file and in forall_unix_socets macro only.
>>
>> The forall_unix_sockets is not used in this file at all so
>> remove it. After this move t
On Thu, Nov 22, 2007 at 04:22:30PM +0300, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
> The first_unix_socket() and next_unix_sockets() are now used
> in proc file and in forall_unix_socets macro only.
>
> The forall_unix_sockets is not used in this file at all so
> remove it. After this move the helpers to where they
The first_unix_socket() and next_unix_sockets() are now used
in proc file and in forall_unix_socets macro only.
The forall_unix_sockets is not used in this file at all so
remove it. After this move the helpers to where they really
belong, i.e. closer to proc code under the #ifdef CONFIG_PROC_FS
o
