[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20150621.102357.102968042925261063.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2015 10:23:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: roopa@...ulusnetworks.com
Cc: sfeldma@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
alexander.duyck@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] ipv4: include NLM_F_APPEND flag in append
route notifications
From: roopa <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 13:37:23 -0700
> On 6/17/15, 11:30 AM, Scott Feldman wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Roopa Prabhu
>> <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com> wrote:
>>> From: Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
>>>
>>> This patch adds NLM_F_APPEND flag to struct nlmsg_hdr->nlmsg_flags
>>> in newroute notifications if the route add was an append.
>>> (This is similar to how NLM_F_REPLACE is already part of new
>>> route replace notifications today)
>>>
>>> This helps userspace determine if the route add operation was
>>> an append.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
>>> ---
>>> v2: flip if condition around append and change |= to =
>>> (feedback from Alexander Duyck and Scott Feldman)
>> Is this a bug fix for net, or a new feature for net-next? Regardless,
>>
>> Acked-by: Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...il.com>
> I could not decide between net and net-next.
> ....but the patch applies cleanly against net if Dave decides to pick
> it up for net.
It's been like this for so long that it's more like a new feature.
Therefore, applied to net-next, thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
Powered by blists - more mailing lists