On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 6:57 PM, Manuel Bouyer <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 06:51:06PM +0900, Ryota Ozaki wrote: >> >> Any comments? >> > >> > why not change in6_if_link_up() to use a delay >= 1 instead of 0 ? >> >> My change intends to make it clear whether a callout will be used >> or not. I think it's error-prone. > > for me, it's clear that a timeout of 0 means immediately, and so a > callout is not needed. I wouldn't expect a timeout of 0 to run through > a callout. I would also expect a negative timeout to either be EINVAL or > equivalent to 0.
Hmm, we have different feelings :-| Anyway I don't so stick to my approach. I just want to fix the problem and avoid further abuse of the function somehow. So changing delay >= 1 and adding some caveat about its behavior to nd6_dad_start would be okay. ozaki-r > > -- > Manuel Bouyer <[email protected]> > NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference > --
