Re: [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission policy!)

From: Gleb Natapov (gleb@nbase.co.il)
Date: Sun Jan 07 2001 - 11:30:32 EST

Next message: Rik van Riel: "Re: Linux-2.4.x patch submission policy"
Previous message: Jeff Forbes: "PROBLEM with raid5 and 2.4.0 kernel"
In reply to: jamal: "Re: [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission policy!)"
Next in thread: jamal: "Re: [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission policy!)"
Reply: jamal: "Re: [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission policy!)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 10:56:23AM -0500, jamal wrote:
[snip]
>
> I used to be against VLANS being devices, i am withdrawing that comment; it's
> a lot easier to look on them as devices if you want to run IP on them. And
> in this case, it makes sense the possibilirt of over a thousand devices
> is good.
>

Glad to hear :) So perhaps this is a good time to move one of VLAN implementations
into the official kernel?

--
			Gleb.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Rik van Riel: "Re: Linux-2.4.x patch submission policy"
Previous message: Jeff Forbes: "PROBLEM with raid5 and 2.4.0 kernel"
In reply to: jamal: "Re: [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission policy!)"
Next in thread: jamal: "Re: [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission policy!)"
Reply: jamal: "Re: [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission policy!)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 07 2001 - 21:00:29 EST