netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 1/3] [RTNETLINK] Fix RTM_MAX to represent the maximum valid m

To: Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] [RTNETLINK] Fix RTM_MAX to represent the maximum valid message type
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 15:27:04 -0700
Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20050503222003.GQ577@postel.suug.ch>
References: <20050430195058.GC577@postel.suug.ch> <20050503142740.345925ea.davem@davemloft.net> <20050503222003.GQ577@postel.suug.ch>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, 4 May 2005 00:20:03 +0200
Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> * David S. Miller <20050503142740.345925ea.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2005-05-03 
> 14:27
> > Excellent observation.  The fact that we encode the "modifies state"
> > in the low bits of the RTM_* numbers has always been a source of
> > obscure bugs and hard to track down errors.
> > 
> > Patch applied, thanks.
> 
> Do you want 2.4 backports for all patches or just the xfrm
> off-by-one fix?

Congratulations if you can find xfrm in the vanilla
2.4.x tree :-)


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>