On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 03:06:15PM -0000, gerrit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > --- a/net/dccp/probe.c > > +++ b/net/dccp/probe.c > > @@ -161,7 +161,8 @@ static __init int dccpprobe_init(void) > > if (!proc_net_fops_create(&init_net, procname, S_IRUSR, > > &dccpprobe_fops)) > > goto err0; > > > > - ret = try_then_request_module((register_jprobe(&dccp_send_probe) == 0), > > + try_then_request_module( > > + ((ret = register_jprobe(&dccp_send_probe)) == 0), > > "dccp"); > > if (ret) > > goto err1; > > Apologies for the late response -- delays are sometimes possible due to > day job. The only problem that I had with this patch was that it was > apparently not tested, causing the described problems. > > > > I've not tested it, but this should do it, > > without re-breaking the silent dependency. > > I will test it and get back to you until tomorrow morning (GMT), > if it works I'll also push it out in the test tree. > > Thanks a lot for getting back and devising a different route. > Thanks, and apologies for being brusque. I just didn't want to fix what is clearly a problem in what you describe by rebreaking a previously seen problem. I expect this should work just fine. Let me know if it doesn't and I'll resurrect my test bed here and take a look Neil > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dccp" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
