On 12/22/06, Gerrit Renker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Applies on top of my previous patches. (So I have to convince Gerrit of the
| merits of them first!)
I tried to apply it but it bombed out with 3 hunks failing. I like the basic
idea
and have another suggestion:
I've recreated it before my other patches so that it will apply. I'll
have to regenerate my other patches too but I'll send this one in a
few minutes. The others will dribble through probably over next little
while (xmas and all that).
==> dccp_li_update_li() is only called in ccid3_hc_rx_detect_loss() and there
it is called with the arguments
ccid3_hc_rx_update_li(sk, hcrx->ccid3hcrx_seqno_nonloss,
hcrx->ccid3hcrx_ccval_nonloss)
==> Since hcrx derives from sk via pointer-cast, and since the last two
arguments
are fields of hcrx, we could simplify the interface to
ccid3_hc_rx_update_li(sk)
Put this in new patch. Thanks for that.
==> However, I am not sure that the way ccid3_hc_rx_update_li() is called is
as
intentioned.
Not sure what you mean here. Can you explain?
But for the basic idea,
Signed-off-by: Ian McDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Acked-by: Gerrit Renker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Thanks.
Ian
--
Web: http://wand.net.nz/~iam4
Blog: http://imcdnzl.blogspot.com
WAND Network Research Group
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dccp" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
