On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 20:07:48 +0300
Vitaliy Makkoveev wrote:
> I pointed some comments inline.
Thanks,
>> +case PIPEXASESSION:
>> +{
>> +struct pipex_session_req *req =
>> +(struct pipex_session_req *)data;
>> +if ((error = pipex_init_session(,
On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 02:32:57PM +0900, YASUOKA Masahiko wrote:
Hello.
I pointed some comments inline.
> Hi,
>
> Thank you for your comments.
>
> On Mon, 17 Aug 2020 00:15:08 +0300
> Vitaliy Makkoveev wrote:
> > I like your idea to kill `pipex_iface_context'. I had trying to keep it
> > by
Hi,
Thank you for your comments.
On Mon, 17 Aug 2020 00:15:08 +0300
Vitaliy Makkoveev wrote:
> I like your idea to kill `pipex_iface_context'. I had trying to keep it
> by myself and this was wrong way. Could you rework your diff to be
> against the recent sources?
I'm sorry the diff was for
On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 05:42:06PM +0900, YASUOKA Masahiko wrote:
> Let me update the diff. A bug found by the test.
>
Hello Yasuoka.
I like your idea to kill `pipex_iface_context'. I had trying to keep it
by myself and this was wrong way. Could you rework your diff to be
against the recent
Let me update the diff. A bug found by the test.
diff --git a/sys/net/if_pppx.c b/sys/net/if_pppx.c
index 62b85bc34af..6d3de6973bd 100644
--- a/sys/net/if_pppx.c
+++ b/sys/net/if_pppx.c
@@ -163,7 +163,6 @@ struct pppx_if {
struct ifnetpxi_if;
struct pppx_dev
This diff makes pipex become more common for pppac and pppx.
- Delete "pipex_iface_context".
It had been created when pppx doesn't exist. This creates some
confusions. For example session->pipex_iface is the device context
when pppac(4) but it's not when pppx(4).
623 Static int
