Re: [PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Jeff Garzik
Date: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 - 6:03 pm

Jeff Garzik wrote:


Adding my own comment :)

Does the ethernet stack check is_valid_ether_addr() before permitting 
interface-up?

I'm wondering if there is a way to avoid adding

	if (!is_valid_ether_addr(dev->dev_addr))
		return -EINVAL;

to every ethernet driver's ->open() hook.

	Jeff


-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [PATCH] Add eeprom_bad_csum_allow module option to e1000., Stephen Hemminger, (Tue Oct 23, 4:53 pm)
[PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes, Jeff Garzik, (Tue Oct 23, 5:55 pm)
Re: [PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes, Jeff Garzik, (Tue Oct 23, 6:03 pm)
Re: [PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes, David Miller, (Tue Oct 23, 6:07 pm)
Re: [PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes, Adrian Bunk, (Tue Oct 23, 6:15 pm)
Re: [PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes, Jeff Garzik, (Tue Oct 23, 7:20 pm)
Re: [PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes, David Miller, (Tue Oct 23, 7:23 pm)
Re: [PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes, Kok, Auke, (Thu Nov 1, 11:04 am)
Re: [PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes, Stephen Hemminger, (Thu Nov 1, 11:11 am)
Re: [PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes, Jeff Garzik, (Thu Nov 1, 11:47 am)
Re: [PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes, Jeff Garzik, (Thu Nov 1, 12:31 pm)