jamal wrote: > On Mon, 2006-04-12 at 14:57 +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote: > > >> I think the complications come from the fact that you remeber two >> policies, but only one seems necessary. How about this (completely >> untested) patch? It simply uses increasing sequence numbers for all >> but the last entry and uses zero for the last one. >> > > > I could give this a try in about 2 hours. But why dont you like the > callback approach? You have to admit, this is hairy code.
Both ways are fine I guess. But the counting has almost no overhead with the patch I sent, so I'm not sure if its worth adding a callback (which still needs to get the last policy/SA as argument, so that part won't get any nicer). BTW, I'm not sure whether there are further requirements than those you quoted, but according to that text, using 1 for all but the last message would be fine as well :) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
