Subject: Re: [RFC] moving the test for sockaddr->sa_family up

From: "David S. Miller" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 12:44:43 -0800

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 17:07:58 -0200
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Em Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 08:56:04AM -0500, James Morris escreveu:
> > On Sat, 15 Nov 2003, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > 
> > > Does anybody see any problem with this simplification? Not for 2.6.0, of
> > > course...
> > 
> > No, looks like a good idea.  Might be able to push address length 
> > verification up there too.
> 
> Not really, look at the ax25 code... :-\ They have to support two address types,
> if we want to keep this flexibility we can't check it at the upper layer,
> does anybody here knows if we want or if we can ditch that thing in ax25? this:

Right, this is the area where you need to be careful, where people
need special semantics just like this ax25 case.

I'm %100 fine with the original cleanup for 2.6.1 or later.