Yeah, if it reports itself as idle while a packet was just retrieved, then 
whether or not it’s actually a candidate to be Process()’d can depend on the 
result of a subsequent select() — seems problematic :)

- Jon

On Oct 2, 2014, at 2:34 PM, Robin Sommer <[email protected]> wrote:

> Never mind, I see that's there already.
> 
> Robin
> 
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 11:48 -0700, I wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 11:25 -0700, Jonathan Siwek wrote:
>> 
>>> +           SetIdle(false);
>> 
>> The 2.1 code was also doing the opposite: setting to true if we have a
>> packet. Not immediately sure if that's necessary.
>> 
>> Robin
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Robin Sommer * Phone +1 (510) 722-6541 *     [email protected]
> ICSI/LBNL    * Fax   +1 (510) 666-2956 * www.icir.org/robin
> _______________________________________________
> bro-commits mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/bro-commits
> 


_______________________________________________
bro-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/bro-dev

Reply via email to