On 18 April 2016 at 15:40, Martin Pieuchot <[email protected]> wrote: > On 18/04/16(Mon) 12:30, Mike Belopuhov wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 15:29 +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote: >> > Instead of rtfree(9)ing the cached route after using it, if it is a >> > multipath one, free it before. >> > >> > Ok? >> > >> >> This changes the case where ipforward_rt.ro_rt is NULL and >> the route that we allocate is RTF_MPATH (is that possible?). >> Before we would free it in the freert branch, but now we >> keep it around. Is that an oversight or an intended change? > > It's the intended change. The end result is the same: the kernel always > do a lookup if the previous result was an RTF_MPATH entry. >
OK, AFAICT it's fine. OK mikeb
