On 13/08/07, James Smart <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ok.... here's what happened,
>
> - We changed the define so that it matched what we are using. We never configure
> more than 4 HBQ, thus the index will never be beyond 0-3. The if-check is actually
> innoculous. Given that the change wasn't your patch, we didn't include you as
> the author.
>
And that's not a problem. I only mentioned it to explain how I
searched for the patch before I resend it.
> - Coding-wise, you are right, we still didn't fix the range check.
>
> Since this really is just something to keep the tools happy - I'll recind the NACK.
> I'll worry about simply removing this if-check later...
>
> James/Andrew, accept this patch - ACK.
>
--
Jesper Juhl <[email protected]>
Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
