[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 1/6] PKT_SCHED: Extended Matches API

To: Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] PKT_SCHED: Extended Matches API
From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 01:56:46 +0100
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20050124004929.GK23931@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20050123230012.GB23931@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050123230132.GC23931@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <41F43D6D.30502@xxxxxxxxx> <20050124004929.GK23931@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20050106 Debian/1.7.5-1
Thomas Graf wrote:

* Patrick McHardy <41F43D6D.30502@xxxxxxxxx> 2005-01-24 01:12
gcc assumes likely for ptr != NULL by default. Is there a reason why a match
wouldn't have a match function ?

There is no reason but ematches might get written by unexperienced people
forgeting to register it. I know, the if partly hides the failure, it's
one of theses case where I have the same arguments for both ways.

I don't care much, but I guess people forgetting to add a match
function to an ematch will find other ways to do stupid things :)
How about catching it in tcf_em_register ?


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