On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 11:47:30AM +0300, Vitaliy Makkoveev wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 11:08:07PM -0900, Philip Guenther wrote:
> > Since pru_rcvd() is only invoked if the protocol has the PR_WANTRCVD flag
> > set, there should be no need to test whether the callback is set: a
> > protocol
On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 11:08:07PM -0900, Philip Guenther wrote:
> Since pru_rcvd() is only invoked if the protocol has the PR_WANTRCVD flag
> set, there should be no need to test whether the callback is set: a
> protocol without the callback MUST NOT have PR_WANTRCVD.
>
> (I guess this could,
Since pru_rcvd() is only invoked if the protocol has the PR_WANTRCVD flag
set, there should be no need to test whether the callback is set: a
protocol without the callback MUST NOT have PR_WANTRCVD.
(I guess this could, alternatively, go the other direction and eliminate
PR_WANTRCVD and use the
On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 01:39:12AM +0300, Vitaliy Makkoveev wrote:
> Another one.
>
> Since we never use `flags' arg within handlers, remove it from the
> pru_rcvd() args.
OK bluhm@
> Index: sys/sys/protosw.h
> ===
> RCS file:
Another one.
Since we never use `flags' arg within handlers, remove it from the
pru_rcvd() args.
Index: sys/sys/protosw.h
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/sys/protosw.h,v
retrieving revision 1.43
diff -u -p -r1.43 protosw.h
---
