On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 13:13 +0200, Henning Brauer wrote: > ..because now you had to initialize both set_prio in pf_rule to it > everywhere. we did that, at least in some parts of our tree... > problem being of course that 0 is a valid value there and can\t easily > be used as "don't touch" indicator. > so use a flag and only ever look at the set_prio fields if the flag is > set. > > this is entirely untested, I am asking you guys to help with this. I > am reaosnably confident this is right tho. > > now excuse me pls, have to bang my head against a wall of queues >
looks good to me. ok mikeb
