From: Colin King
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2018 16:08:51 +
> From: Colin Ian King
>
> A recent change added a null check on p->dev after p->dev was being
> dereferenced by the ns_capable check on p->dev. It turns out that
> neither the p->dev and p->br null checks are necessary, and can be
>
On 25/11/2018 18:08, Colin King wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King
>
> A recent change added a null check on p->dev after p->dev was being
> dereferenced by the ns_capable check on p->dev. It turns out that
> neither the p->dev and p->br null checks are necessary, and can be
> removed, which cleans
From: Colin Ian King
A recent change added a null check on p->dev after p->dev was being
dereferenced by the ns_capable check on p->dev. It turns out that
neither the p->dev and p->br null checks are necessary, and can be
removed, which cleans up a static analyis warning.
As Nikolay Aleksandrov
On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 04:34:20AM +0200, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:
> We have been adding many new bridge options, a big number of which are
> boolean but still take up netlink attribute ids and waste space in the skb.
> Recently we discussed learning from link-local packets[1] and decided
> yet
On 24/11/2018 18:46, niko...@cumulusnetworks.com wrote:
> On 24 November 2018 18:25:41 EET, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 06:18:33PM +0200, niko...@cumulusnetworks.com
>> wrote:
>>> On 24 November 2018 18:10:41 EET, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> +int br_boolopt_toggle(struct
