Re: Simply use rtdeletemsg()

2015-09-30 Thread Martin Pieuchot
On 25/09/15(Fri) 13:07, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > This brings nd6_free() in line with arptfree() and adds a userland > notification for free. > > ok? Anyone? > > Index: netinet6/nd6.c > === > RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/netinet6/nd6.c,v

Re: Simply use rtdeletemsg()

2015-09-30 Thread Stuart Henderson
On 2015/09/30 10:37, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > On 25/09/15(Fri) 13:07, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > > This brings nd6_free() in line with arptfree() and adds a userland > > notification for free. > > > > ok? > > Anyone? There are two differences beside the userland notification - 1. rtdeletemsg()

Re: Simply use rtdeletemsg()

2015-09-30 Thread Martin Pieuchot
On 30/09/15(Wed) 11:21, Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2015/09/30 10:37, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > > On 25/09/15(Fri) 13:07, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > > > This brings nd6_free() in line with arptfree() and adds a userland > > > notification for free. > > > > > > ok? > > > > Anyone? > > There are

Re: Simply use rtdeletemsg()

2015-09-30 Thread Mike Belopuhov
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 10:37 +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > On 25/09/15(Fri) 13:07, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > > This brings nd6_free() in line with arptfree() and adds a userland > > notification for free. > > > > ok? > > Anyone? > Since nobody has complained so far that arp is doing this, I

Simply use rtdeletemsg()

2015-09-25 Thread Martin Pieuchot
This brings nd6_free() in line with arptfree() and adds a userland notification for free. ok? Index: netinet6/nd6.c === RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/netinet6/nd6.c,v retrieving revision 1.154 diff -u -p -r1.154 nd6.c --- netinet6/nd6.c

Re: Use rtdeletemsg()

2015-01-26 Thread Martin Pieuchot
On 23/01/15(Fri) 19:59, Alexander Bluhm wrote: On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 11:49:53AM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote: Instead of rerolling rtrequest1(RTM_DELETE...) code in various places, I am a fan of code unification. simply use rtdeletemsg() which also notify userland that the route entry

Re: Use rtdeletemsg()

2015-01-23 Thread Alexander Bluhm
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 01:22:47PM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote: It is indeed confusing. I tried to check every cases but in the end I think that it might be better to decouple the removal from the routing table and the rtfree(). Updated diff below does that. I think the code is not

Re: Use rtdeletemsg()

2015-01-23 Thread Alexander Bluhm
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 11:49:53AM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote: Instead of rerolling rtrequest1(RTM_DELETE...) code in various places, simply use rtdeletemsg() which also notify userland that the route entry is going away. Comments, ok? I think this version of the diff is correct

Re: Use rtdeletemsg()

2015-01-23 Thread Alexander Bluhm
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 11:49:53AM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote: Instead of rerolling rtrequest1(RTM_DELETE...) code in various places, I am a fan of code unification. simply use rtdeletemsg() which also notify userland that the route entry is going away. When we notify the userland about

Re: Use rtdeletemsg()

2015-01-21 Thread Martin Pieuchot
On 19/01/15(Mon) 09:35, Todd C. Miller wrote: On Mon, 19 Jan 2015 11:49:53 +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote: Instead of rerolling rtrequest1(RTM_DELETE...) code in various places, simply use rtdeletemsg() which also notify userland that the route entry is going away. Since rtdeletemsg

Use rtdeletemsg()

2015-01-19 Thread Martin Pieuchot
Instead of rerolling rtrequest1(RTM_DELETE...) code in various places, simply use rtdeletemsg() which also notify userland that the route entry is going away. Comments, ok? Index: netinet/ip_icmp.c === RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys

Re: Use rtdeletemsg()

2015-01-19 Thread Todd C. Miller
On Mon, 19 Jan 2015 11:49:53 +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote: Instead of rerolling rtrequest1(RTM_DELETE...) code in various places, simply use rtdeletemsg() which also notify userland that the route entry is going away. Since rtdeletemsg() may call rtfree() doesn't this mean that we can end up