The patch looks good to me. Applied.
Cheers,
Simon.
On 19/05/2022 10:43, Beniamino Galvani wrote:
On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 04:10:52PM +0200, Geert Stappers via Dnsmasq-discuss
wrote:
There new lines and one old line
+ if (rta->rta_type == IFA_LOCAL)
+ addrp = ((struct in6_addr *)(rta+1));
+ else if (rta->rta_type == IFA_ADDRESS && !addrp)
addrp = ((struct in6_addr *)(rta+1));
rewritten as I see them
+ if (conditionLOCAL)
+ addrp = value
+ else if (conditionADDRESS && !addrp)
addrp = value
It is the "&& !addrp" that makes me feel uncomfortable.
Would
+ if (conditionLOCAL)
+ addrp = value
+ else if (conditionADDRESS)
addrp = value
do?
It wouldn't work, because a netlink message for an address with peer
has:
IFA_LOCAL = addr
IFA_ADDRESS = peer
We would first evaluate IFA_LOCAL and set addrp = addr, then overwrite
it with peer when evaluating the next attribute IFA_ADDRESS.
Since we are interested in 'addr', when IFA_LOCAL is present it should
always override IFA_ADDRESS.
P.S.
@Beniamino welcome to dnsmasq
Thanks,
Beniamino
_______________________________________________
Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list
Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk
https://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss
_______________________________________________
Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list
Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk
https://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss
