On Thu, 2009-04-23 at 04:43 -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Ursula Braun <ubraun@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 13:39:16 +0200 > > > the af_iucv-patches sent today apply to net-next-2.6 without pulling > > yesterday's patches for net-2.6. > > > > If you prefer to pull net-2.6 first (in order to avoid potential future > > merge conflicts), I can rebuild and resend today's net-next-2.6 patches > > based on yesterday's af_iucv patches for net-2.6. > > I applied them all, then pulled net-2.6 into net-next-2.6 to > resolve the conflicts. > > Please make sure I did the right thing :-) Dave, net/iucv/af_iucv.c in net-next-2.6 is almost correct. 4 lines should still be deleted. These are the remaining changes: --- net/iucv/af_iucv.c | 4 ---- 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-) Index: net-next-2.6-uschi/net/iucv/af_iucv.c =================================================================== --- net-next-2.6-uschi.orig/net/iucv/af_iucv.c +++ net-next-2.6-uschi/net/iucv/af_iucv.c @@ -982,8 +982,6 @@ static int iucv_sock_recvmsg(struct kioc if (flags & (MSG_OOB)) return -EOPNOTSUPP; - target = sock_rcvlowat(sk, flags & MSG_WAITALL, len); - /* receive/dequeue next skb: * the function understands MSG_PEEK and, thus, does not dequeue skb */ skb = skb_recv_datagram(sk, flags, noblock, &err); @@ -1429,8 +1427,6 @@ static void iucv_callback_rx(struct iucv iucv_process_message(sk, skb, path, msg); goto out_unlock; - return; - save_message: save_msg = kzalloc(sizeof(struct sock_msg_q), GFP_ATOMIC | GFP_DMA); if (!save_msg) Thanks a lot for your effort. Regards, Ursula Braun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-s390" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
