On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 14:33 +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote: > Johannes Berg wrote: > > Is it intentional that in the case where set_rx_mode is assigned, you > > still need to assign set_multicast_list even if it won't ever be called > > as a flag for SIOCADDMULTI? > > > > I was thinking of converting the wireless code to use set_rx_mode and > > assign set_multicast_list only if the underlying hardware supports > > multicast filtering, and it seems that is well-supported, but it does > > seem a bit weird that set_multicast_list degrades to a flag. > > > Indeed, I missed that. It should check for !dev->set_multicast_list && > !dev->set_rx_mode before returning -EINVAL.
Hmm. We don't really support multiple unicast addresses so I should probably not use set_rx_mode. What is the meaning of dev->change_rx_flags? It seems to be called with IFF_ALLMULTI but if it is assigned and set_multicast_list is not then you also cannot add multicast addresses via SIOCADDMULTI. johannes
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
