Joe Nosay wrote:
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 10:20 PM, Kevin Lo <> wrote:

On 2014/03/28 00:21, John Baldwin wrote:

On Thursday, March 27, 2014 5:32:16 am Kevin Lo wrote:

Are you interested in working on these and report back?
The revised patch is available at:

Thank you for your suggestions.
  A few suggestions:
- I would just drop the INP lock and return EOPNOTSUPP directly rather
     than using goto's to 'bad_setoptname' and 'bad_getoptname' so the
     UDP-lite options are self-contained.



  - I'm not a super big fan of all the udp_common_* macros only because
     I think it obfuscates things.  At the very least, please move these
     things out of the header and into udp_usrreq.c so they are closer
     to the implementation.  I would even suggest making them inline
     functions instead of macros.

Okay, I removed two udp_common_* macros.  I also renamed
to udp_udplite_init() and moved it into udp_usrreq.c.  Using a macro here
to follow the style used in SCTP (sctp_os_bsd.h).

Here's a third version of the udp-lite patch:

Ok, I would say that udp_common_init() is actually a better name if you
the macro (which I think is fine) rather than udp_udplite_init() as the
is not specific to UDP Lite.  However, thanks for moving the macros out
of the

Thank you John.  glebius@ suggests we don't need to have two absolutely
equal uma zones since most systems don't run UDP-Lite.
If practice shows that a differentiation at zone level between UDP and
UDP-Lite PCBs is important, then it could be done later.

Following up with a fourth version of the udp-lite patch.

On top of the previous versions, this:
         - removes a uma zone for udp-lite
         - udp_common_ctlinput() belongs under #ifdef INET
         - removes sysctl nodes for udp-lite.
         - bumps version and adds my copyright.


Do I patch over the current src- which was already patched with version 3-
or do I just start new?

Start new, thanks.


_______________________________________________ mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to ""

Reply via email to