Make sure if_output() and if_start() will never be called for the
bridge(4).
Concerns?
Index: net/if_bridge.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/net/if_bridge.c,v
retrieving revision 1.273
diff -u -p -r1.273 if_bridge.c
--- net/if_bridge.c
On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 09:57:59AM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> Make sure if_output() and if_start() will never be called for the
> bridge(4).
>
> Concerns?
>
You should clarify in the comment above the actual bridge_output()
function that this function is intended to be used by bridgeport /
On 02/12/15(Wed) 10:25, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 09:57:59AM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > Make sure if_output() and if_start() will never be called for the
> > bridge(4).
> >
> > Concerns?
>
> Why not use if_detached_start()? There is no if_detached_output() but we
>
On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 09:57:59AM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> Make sure if_output() and if_start() will never be called for the
> bridge(4).
>
> Concerns?
Why not use if_detached_start()? There is no if_detached_output() but we
could add that as well. I would prefer that over NULL pointers
On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 11:07:40AM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> On 02/12/15(Wed) 10:25, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 09:57:59AM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > > Make sure if_output() and if_start() will never be called for the
> > > bridge(4).
> > >
> > > Concerns?
> >
> On 2 Dec 2015, at 8:49 PM, Claudio Jeker wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 11:07:40AM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
>> On 02/12/15(Wed) 10:25, Claudio Jeker wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 09:57:59AM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
Make sure if_output() and