Re: [PATCHv4 5/6] Allow setting O_NONBLOCK flag for new sockets

From: Ulrich Drepper <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 08:04:53 -0800

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> David Miller wrote:
> > Where does this INDIRECT_PARAM() macro get defined?  I do not
> > see it being defined anywhere in these patches.
> 
> Defined in <linux/indirect.h>:
> 
> +#define INDIRECT_PARAM(set, name) current->indirect_params.set.name
> 
> Not my idea, I was following one review comment.

This was not in the patches you posted, I double checked before
sending my reply.
-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCHv4 5/6] Allow setting O_NONBLOCK flag for new sockets
    • From: Zach Brown <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCHv4 5/6] Allow setting O_NONBLOCK flag for new sockets
    • From: Ulrich Drepper <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCHv4 5/6] Allow setting O_NONBLOCK flag for new sockets
    • From: David Miller <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCHv4 5/6] Allow setting O_NONBLOCK flag for new sockets
    • From: Ulrich Drepper <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [rfc 04/45] cpu alloc: Use in SLUB
• Next by Date: Re: [stable] Soft lockups since stable kernel upgrade to 2.6.23.8
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCHv4 5/6] Allow setting O_NONBLOCK flag for new sockets
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCHv4 5/6] Allow setting O_NONBLOCK flag for new sockets
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]