2018-07-09 22:48 GMT+09:00 Pablo Neira Ayuso <pa...@netfilter.org>:
> On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 11:40:06PM +0900, Taehee Yoo wrote:
>> 2018-07-03 19:20 GMT+09:00 Pablo Neira Ayuso <pa...@netfilter.org>:
>> > On Sun, Jul 01, 2018 at 08:44:52PM +0900, Taehee Yoo wrote:
>> >> This patch fixes below.
>> >> 1. check null pointer of rb_next.
>> >>  rb_next can return null. so null check routine should be added.
>> >> 2. check whether an interval flags is set or not.
>> >>  If interval flags is given, both a start node and a end node
>> >>  should be removed at once. If interval flags it not given,
>> >>  is doesn't matter.
>> >
>>
>> Thank you for reviewing!
>>
>> > For #2, I would prefer we reject rbtree for single elements. I'm going
>> > to send a patch for this.
>> >
>> > Would you rebase 1. and 3. on top?
>> >
>> > Thanks!
>> >
>>
>> Of course!
>> Do you mean that the 'top' is current top? or next top?
>
> I mean, on top of this one:
>
> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/940650/
>
> which makes sure we cannot use the interval set with single elements,
> which I understand is one of the problems this patch is addressing.
>
> Thanks.

Thanks for letting me know
I understood

Thanks
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to