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

netdev

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

To:	"David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	Re: [PATCH 1/3] [RTNETLINK] Fix RTM_MAX to represent the maximum valid message type
From:	Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Date:	Wed, 4 May 2005 00:20:03 +0200
Cc:	netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to:	<20050503142740.345925ea.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References:	<20050430195058.GC577@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050503142740.345925ea.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender:	netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx

* 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?

[More with this subject...]

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: [PATCH 1/3] [RTNETLINK] Fix RTM_MAX to represent the maximum valid message type, David S. Miller Re: [PATCH 1/3] [RTNETLINK] Fix RTM_MAX to represent the maximum valid message type, Thomas Graf <= Re: [PATCH 1/3] [RTNETLINK] Fix RTM_MAX to represent the maximum valid message type, David S. Miller Re: [PATCH 1/3] [RTNETLINK] Fix RTM_MAX to represent the maximum valid message type, Thomas Graf

Previous by Date:	Re: Mystery packet killing tg3, David S. Miller
Next by Date:	Re: Mystery packet killing tg3, Michael Chan
Previous by Thread:	Re: [PATCH 1/3] [RTNETLINK] Fix RTM_MAX to represent the maximum valid message type, David S. Miller
Next by Thread:	Re: [PATCH 1/3] [RTNETLINK] Fix RTM_MAX to represent the maximum valid message type, David S. Miller
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]