From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matti Vaittinen Subject: Re: [PATCH RESUBMIT2 net-next 1/2] IPv6 routing, NLM_F_* flag support: warn if NEWROUTE lacks of both CREATE and REPLACE flags Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 11:37:54 +0200 Message-ID: <1321263474.1858.8.camel@hakki> References: <1321254611.23935.15.camel@hakki> <20111114.020617.136865443034405914.davem@davemloft.net> <1321259480.23935.75.camel@hakki> <20111114.033608.2000639077648429389.davem@davemloft.net> Reply-To: matti.vaittinen@nsn.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: ext David Miller Return-path: Received: from demumfd002.nsn-inter.net ([93.183.12.31]:13335 "EHLO demumfd002.nsn-inter.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751922Ab1KNJ0W convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Nov 2011 04:26:22 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20111114.033608.2000639077648429389.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 03:36 -0500, ext David Miller wrote: > From: Matti Vaittinen > Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 10:31:20 +0200 >=20 > > Messages can be changed, that's no problem. I would like to hear su= ggestions=20 > > because I personally see not much problems in current messages.=20 >=20 > You don't even say that the route request is for an ipv6 route. I'll add the IPv6 in prints, and also look through the =C5=95est of the= prints=20 in 2/2 patch && see if I can think of something to improve. Also, this patch (1/2) has wrong subject and explanation - total brainf= art from my side, sorry. The check for NLM_F_REPLACE is not in this, but in= =20 the 2/2 patch. I'll correct subject and explanation too. --=20 Matti Vaittinen +358 504863070 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Told a UDP joke the other night... =2E..but I'm not sure everyone got it... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~