From: Bartosz Golaszewski
Date: Tue, 12 May 2020 08:04:39 +0200
> I will if you insist but would you mind sharing some details on why it
> was removed? To me it still makes more sense than storing the pointer
> to a structure in *that* structure.
Flexibility in implementation of where the privat
pon., 11 maj 2020 o 22:41 David Miller napisał(a):
>
> From: Bartosz Golaszewski
> Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 17:07:50 +0200
>
> > From: Bartosz Golaszewski
> >
> > Appropriate amount of extra memory for private data is allocated at
> > the end of struct net_device. We have a helper - netdev_priv()
From: Bartosz Golaszewski
Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 17:07:50 +0200
> From: Bartosz Golaszewski
>
> Appropriate amount of extra memory for private data is allocated at
> the end of struct net_device. We have a helper - netdev_priv() - that
> returns its address but we don't have the reverse: a func
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 05:07:50PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> From: Bartosz Golaszewski
>
> Appropriate amount of extra memory for private data is allocated at
> the end of struct net_device. We have a helper - netdev_priv() - that
> returns its address but we don't have the reverse: a f
From: Bartosz Golaszewski
Appropriate amount of extra memory for private data is allocated at
the end of struct net_device. We have a helper - netdev_priv() - that
returns its address but we don't have the reverse: a function which
given the address of the private data, returns the address of str
