On Thu, 2017-05-04 at 14:15 -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > Quoting Joe Perches <j...@perches.com>: > > > On Thu, 2017-05-04 at 14:00 -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > > > Regarding the code comments, what about the following patch: > > > > [] > > > diff --git a/net/ipv4/inet_diag.c b/net/ipv4/inet_diag.c > > > > [] > > > @@ -389,6 +389,12 @@ static int sk_diag_fill(struct sock *sk, struct > > > sk_buff *skb, > > > nlmsg_flags, unlh, net_admin); > > > } > > > > > > +/* > > > + * Ignore the position of the arguments req->id.idiag_dport and > > > + * req->id.idiag_sport in both calls to inet_lookup() and inet6_lookup() > > > + * functions, once this is a locked in behavior exposed to user space. > > > + * Changing this will break things for people. > > > + */ > > > struct sock *inet_diag_find_one_icsk(struct net *net, > > > struct inet_hashinfo *hashinfo, > > > const struct inet_diag_req_v2 *req) > > > > > > > Seems sensible. Thanks. > > Should I resend it in a full and proper format or it can taken from here?
If you want it applied, it should be resent as a full patch with your sign-off.
