Claudio Jeker(cje...@diehard.n-r-g.com) on 2015.09.22 16:01:34 +0200:
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 03:14:18PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > Instead of incrementing the rt_use counter when a rtalloc(9) call
> > succeeds, let's do it inside ralloc(9).
> >
> > The route(8) regress tests will need
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 03:14:18PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> Instead of incrementing the rt_use counter when a rtalloc(9) call
> succeeds, let's do it inside ralloc(9).
>
> The route(8) regress tests will need to be updated because all the
> paths calling rtalloc(9) do not increment rt_use.
Instead of incrementing the rt_use counter when a rtalloc(9) call
succeeds, let's do it inside ralloc(9).
The route(8) regress tests will need to be updated because all the
paths calling rtalloc(9) do not increment rt_use.
This change gives us a better understanding of which routes are queried
