From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Florian Westphal Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] expect: consider all expect attributes when comparing Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 22:33:40 +0200 Message-ID: <20130605203340.GD15131@breakpoint.cc> References: <1370091571-23140-1-git-send-email-fw@strlen.de> <1370091571-23140-3-git-send-email-fw@strlen.de> <20130605025111.GA17004@localhost> <20130605073529.GA15131@breakpoint.cc> <20130605154101.GC15131@breakpoint.cc> <20130605174619.GB3553@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Florian Westphal , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org To: Pablo Neira Ayuso Return-path: Received: from Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc ([80.244.247.6]:42181 "EHLO Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757222Ab3FEUdl (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jun 2013 16:33:41 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130605174619.GB3553@localhost> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 05:41:01PM +0200, Florian Westphal wrote: > > Hrm, I think a better option is to not compare the expectation timeout > > in the first place. I think the timeout is an irrelevant meta detail; > > if the actual expectations are identical, nfexp_cmp should say so even > > if they happen to have different timeouts. > > That's fine with me, we don't have any requirement for such feature at > this moment. So just skip it. Probably adding a short comment in the > code would be a good idea as placeholder. Perfect! I've pushed all three patches, with ATTR_TIMEOUT compare replaced by a comment.