Le mercredi 24 septembre 2008 19:25:07 Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo, vous avez écrit :

Em Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 07:11:38PM +0300, Remi Denis-Courmont escreveu:

quoted

From: Rémi Denis-Courmont <redacted>

Signed-off-by: Rémi Denis-Courmont <redacted>
---
 net/phonet/pn_netlink.c |   91
++++++++++++++++++----------------------------- 1 files changed, 35
insertions(+), 56 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/phonet/pn_netlink.c b/net/phonet/pn_netlink.c
index b1ea19a..b1770d6 100644
--- a/net/phonet/pn_netlink.c
+++ b/net/phonet/pn_netlink.c

@@ -54,11 +54,16 @@ errout:
 		rtnl_set_sk_err(dev_net(dev), RTNLGRP_PHONET_IFADDR, err);
 }

-static int newaddr_doit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct nlmsghdr *nlm, void

*attr) +static const struct nla_policy ifa_phonet_policy[IFA_MAX+1] = {

since you are changing the above line, please use [IFA_MAX + 1] for
consistency

Fine with me. But but... does that mean I should patch these too?

% grep -re 'IFA_MAX *+' net/
net/decnet/dn_dev.c:static const struct nla_policy dn_ifa_policy[IFA_MAX+1] = {
net/decnet/dn_dev.c:    struct nlattr *tb[IFA_MAX+1];
net/decnet/dn_dev.c:    struct nlattr *tb[IFA_MAX+1];
net/ipv6/addrconf.c:static const struct nla_policy ifa_ipv6_policy[IFA_MAX+1] = {
net/ipv6/addrconf.c:    struct nlattr *tb[IFA_MAX+1];
net/ipv6/addrconf.c:    struct nlattr *tb[IFA_MAX+1];
net/ipv6/addrconf.c:    struct nlattr *tb[IFA_MAX+1];
net/ipv4/devinet.c:static const struct nla_policy ifa_ipv4_policy[IFA_MAX+1] = {
net/ipv4/devinet.c:     struct nlattr *tb[IFA_MAX+1];
net/ipv4/devinet.c:     struct nlattr *tb[IFA_MAX+1];

(I wish I had to learn how to add it to checkpatch, as with && at EOL)

-- 
Rémi Denis-Courmont
http://www.remlab.net/