Hi James and all,

> I've been busy with other things, so I haven't had time to look at
> this.  You may need to get someone else to review it.

Even if you don't consider your work a review, this is a lot already. :-)

> The design seems reasonable to me; it looks like we just avoid purging
> offers if the server address is one of our other addresses.  The
> reasoning behind this seems sound.

Glad to hear. Thanks.

> Unfortunately, I don't know enough about the code you're changing to
> know if there might be other issues related to this change.  (I think
> meem or perhaps Dave Miner would know better.)

I would very much appreciate if someone else would review the changes.

Thank you for your comments on the code.

> Some notes on the code itself:
> 
>   - Please remove references to the CR number from the comments in the
>     code.

Done.

>   - is_our_address() looks like a boolean_t function, not an int
>     function.

Yes, sorry.

>   - It shouldn't be necessary to pass 'serverid' by reference to that
>     function; it's just a 4-byte integer value.  Either passing it as
>     a structure or passing .s_addr (as in_addr_t) would be preferable.

Changed.

>   - I don't think that the use of ifp_mtx does much here; the read of
>     ifp->addr.s_addr is an atomic action anyway.  It's a nit, but I'd
>     remove the use of that lock.

Changed.

>   - Please remove the 'iflist traversal taken ...' comment; it doesn't
>     explain the code.

Done.

I've updated the webrev at

http://cr.opensolaris.org/~nigoroll/6667021_dhcpd_purge_own_offer/

Thank you, Nils
_______________________________________________
networking-discuss mailing list
[email protected]

Reply via email to