On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 8:42 PM, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
quoted text
> On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 01:16:23PM +0200, Heiko Carstens wrote:
>
>  > I don't think such arch specific patches should go in via net-2.6.
>  > You did that for a very similar patch for s390 and it was subtly broken:
>  >
>  > See:
>  > f994aae1bd8e4813d59a2ed64d17585fe42d03fc
>  > ("[NET]: S390 checksum annotations and cleanups.")
>  >
>  > and
>  >
>  > afbc1e994ddcf3b6fe2dc928ee8dc31a5d0c3118
>  > ("[S390] Fix TCP/UDP pseudo header checksum computation.")
>
>  I remember, and AFAICT this one is safe - here everything stays within
>  C and type changes ought to be equivalent transformations.  Said that,
>  I do _NOT_ have hardware in question and it's completely untested at
>  runtime.
>

Sorry for the delay. I will test this patch on Blackfin arch. And if it is ok,
it will be merged to Blackfin git tree. As long as it is a Blackfin
arch related issue,
merging to Blackfin tree is a better way.

quoted text
>  Al, who really couldn't care less which tree that goes through - up to
>  davem and blackfin maintainers; both are on Cc, so...
>

Thanks
-Bryan
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/