[2.5] compile fixes for recent changes to include/net/sock.h
PATCH 1/1 [2.5] compile fixes for recent changes to include/net/sock.h
Hi
This fixes compile failures due to recent changes in include/net/sock.h. Seems like a lot of struct sock's members had a 'sk_' appended, but changes to following was missed:
drivers/net/ethertap.c
fs/smbfs/sock.c
fs/smbfs/proc.c
If any queries, please also CC me at <fgs at lantic.net>, as current mail offline until monday.
Regards,
Signature · 1 line
Martin Schlemmer
drivers/net/ethertap.c +4 -4
@@ -292,19 +292,19 @@ static __inline__ int ethertap_rx_skb(ststatic void ethertap_rx (struct sock *sk,int len) { -struct net_device *dev = tap_map[sk->protocol]; +struct net_device *dev = tap_map[sk->sk_protocol];struct sk_buff *skb;if (dev==NULL ) {printk (KERN_CRIT "ethertap: bad unit!\n" ); -skb_queue_purge (&sk->receive_queue); +skb_queue_purge (&sk->sk_receive_queue);return ; }if (ethertap_debug >3 )printk ("%s: ethertap_rx()\n" , dev->name); -while ((skb =skb_dequeue (&sk->receive_queue)) !=NULL ) +while ((skb =skb_dequeue (&sk->sk_receive_queue)) !=NULL )ethertap_rx_skb (skb, dev); }
@@ -320,7 +320,7 @@ static int ethertap_close(struct net_devif (sk) { lp->nl =NULL ; -sock_release (sk->socket); +sock_release (sk->sk_socket); }return 0 ;
fs/smbfs/proc.c +2 -2
@@ -900,10 +900,10 @@ smb_newconn(struct smb_sb_info *server,* Store the server in sock user_data (Only used by sunrpc) */ sk =SOCKET_I (filp->f_dentry->d_inode)->sk; - sk->user_data = server; + sk->sk_user_data = server;/* chain into the data_ready callback */ - server->data_ready =xchg (&sk->data_ready, smb_data_ready); + server->data_ready =xchg (&sk->sk_data_ready, smb_data_ready);/* check if we have an old smbmount that uses seconds for the serverzone */
fs/smbfs/sock.c +7 -7
@@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ _recvfrom(struct socket *socket, unsignestatic struct smb_sb_info *server_from_socket (struct socket *socket) { -return socket->sk->user_data; +return socket->sk->sk_user_data; }/*
@@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ server_from_socket(struct socket *socketvoid smb_data_ready (struct sock *sk,int len) { -struct smb_sb_info *server =server_from_socket (sk->socket); +struct smb_sb_info *server =server_from_socket (sk->sk_socket);void (*data_ready)(struct sock *,int ) = server->data_ready;data_ready (sk, len);
@@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ smb_close_socket(struct smb_sb_info *serstruct socket *sock =server_sock (server);VERBOSE ("closing socket %p\n" , sock); - sock->sk->data_ready = server->data_ready; + sock->sk->sk_data_ready = server->data_ready; server->sock_file =NULL ;fput (file); }
@@ -226,7 +226,7 @@ smb_receive_header(struct smb_sb_info *s sock =server_sock (server);if (!sock) goto out; -if (sock->sk->state !=TCP_ESTABLISHED ) +if (sock->sk->sk_state !=TCP_ESTABLISHED ) goto out;if (!server->smb_read) {
@@ -290,7 +290,7 @@ smb_receive_drop(struct smb_sb_info *ser sock =server_sock (server);if (!sock) goto out; -if (sock->sk->state !=TCP_ESTABLISHED ) +if (sock->sk->sk_state !=TCP_ESTABLISHED ) goto out; fs =get_fs ();
@@ -345,7 +345,7 @@ smb_receive(struct smb_sb_info *server, sock =server_sock (server);if (!sock) goto out; -if (sock->sk->state !=TCP_ESTABLISHED ) +if (sock->sk->sk_state !=TCP_ESTABLISHED ) goto out; fs =get_fs ();
@@ -400,7 +400,7 @@ smb_send_request(struct smb_request *req sock =server_sock (server);if (!sock) goto out; -if (sock->sk->state !=TCP_ESTABLISHED ) +if (sock->sk->sk_state !=TCP_ESTABLISHED ) goto out; msg.msg_name =NULL ;
Em Sat, Jun 07, 2003 at 07:30:25PM +0200, Martin Schlemmer escreveu:
Quoted 9 lines
Hi
This fixes compile failures due to recent changes in
include/net/sock.h. Seems like a lot of struct sock's members had a 'sk_' appended, but changes to following was missed:
drivers/net/ethertap.c
fs/smbfs/sock.c
fs/smbfs/proc.c
Thanks a lot, the smbfs one was already merged by Linus, somebody submitted it some hours ago, the ethertap I'll push to DaveM today.
Question: it is marked as OBSOLETE, should we ditch it now?
- Arnaldo
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 18:03:38 -0300
Question: it is marked as OBSOLETE, should we ditch it now?
Unfortunately I have no idea how widely used ethertap is these days, and more importantly if most people have switched over to tun/tap for those kinds of applications.
Em Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 02:11:29AM -0700, David S. Miller escreveu:
Quoted 8 lines
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 18:03:38 -0300Question: it is marked as OBSOLETE, should we ditch it now?
Unfortunately I have no idea how widely used ethertap is these days, and more importantly if most people have switched over to tun/tap for those kinds of applications.
I see, ok, it is already marked OBSOLETE, so we can ditch it in 2.8/3.0.
- Arnaldo
Hi David.
Quoted 3 lines
Unfortunately I have no idea how widely used ethertap is these days, and more importantly if most people have switched over to tun/tap for those kinds of applications.
Red Hat 9 includes at least one application that still uses ethertap as I received an error message suggesting that I set up an ethertap device when running it about a fortnight ago. Unfortunately, I don't remember which app it was, sorry...
Best wishes from Riley.
---
* Nothing as pretty as a smile, nothing as ugly as a frown.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.488 / Virus Database: 287 - Release Date: 5-Jun-2003