From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jamal Subject: Re: xfrm_add_sa_expire return codes Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:31:06 -0500 Message-ID: <1172536266.4847.4.camel@localhost> References: <499d6ed30702261426r107fb555hd621418376f5c61c@mail.gmail.com> <20070226.144854.102122743.davem@davemloft.net> Reply-To: hadi@cyberus.ca Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: shpedoikal@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from nz-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.162.235]:4727 "EHLO nz-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750878AbXB0AbO (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:31:14 -0500 Received: by nz-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id s1so1417462nze for ; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 16:31:10 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20070226.144854.102122743.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2007-26-02 at 14:48 -0800, David Miller wrote: > Indeed, and the tabbing on the first "err = " assignment should > be a clue that some mistake might have been added. > > It looks like the code has been like that from day one, I wonder > how Jamal tested this stuff :-) > I am asking myself the same question staring at that;-> Let me look at the test code tommorow and get back to you. I know my test was "passing" ;-> > I'm going to assume the intended logic, and fix it like this. > Jamal? > Looks good - thanks Dave. cheers, jamal