Re: [PATCH 1/1] double xfrm_state_put bug fix

2006-01-17 Thread James Morris
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, David S. Miller wrote: > From: James Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 21:27:05 -0500 (EST) > > > This is confusing code, how about a comment? > > There is a big comment in __xfrm_state_delete(), would you like > something more? :-) No, my fault. - James

Re: [PATCH 1/1] double xfrm_state_put bug fix

2006-01-17 Thread Catherine Zhang
This is much better. Sorry for the confusion. With a clear comment like this, I don't think it'll happen again. thanks, Catherine On 1/17/06, Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 06:29:26PM -0800, David S. Miller wrote: > > > > There is a big comment in __xfrm_state_d

Re: [PATCH 1/1] double xfrm_state_put bug fix

2006-01-17 Thread Herbert Xu
On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 06:29:26PM -0800, David S. Miller wrote: > > There is a big comment in __xfrm_state_delete(), would you like > something more? :-) How about something like this? This should make someone think twice before treating it as a duplicate. [IPSEC]: Turn first xfrm_state_put int

Re: [PATCH 1/1] double xfrm_state_put bug fix

2006-01-17 Thread David S. Miller
From: James Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 21:27:05 -0500 (EST) > This is confusing code, how about a comment? There is a big comment in __xfrm_state_delete(), would you like something more? :-) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of

Re: [PATCH 1/1] double xfrm_state_put bug fix

2006-01-17 Thread James Morris
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Herbert Xu wrote: > cxzhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Fix for a minor double xfrm_state_put() bug. > > This is bogus. It takes two puts to really kill the state. The > same thing happens in xfrm_user of course. This is confusing code, how about a comment? - Jam

Re: [PATCH 1/1] double xfrm_state_put bug fix

2006-01-17 Thread Herbert Xu
cxzhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Fix for a minor double xfrm_state_put() bug. This is bogus. It takes two puts to really kill the state. The same thing happens in xfrm_user of course. Cheers, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: [PATCH 1/1] double xfrm_state_put bug fix

2006-01-17 Thread Patrick McHardy
cxzhang wrote: Fix for a minor double xfrm_state_put() bug. Both xfrm_state_put's are needed, explanation copied from http://oss.sgi.com/projects/netdev/archive/2005-05/msg00361.html: We hold two references (one from xfrm_state_alloc(), one from xfrm_state_hold()), but only drop one. We need

Re: [PATCH 1/1] double xfrm_state_put bug fix

2006-01-17 Thread James Morris
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, cxzhang wrote: > > Fix for a minor double xfrm_state_put() bug. > > --- > > net/key/af_key.c |1 - > 1 files changed, 1 deletion(-) > > diff -puN net/key/af_key.c~bugfix net/key/af_key.c > --- linux-2.6.15/net/key/af_key.c~bugfix2006-01-17 19:47:20.280890504 > -

[PATCH 1/1] double xfrm_state_put bug fix

2006-01-17 Thread cxzhang
Fix for a minor double xfrm_state_put() bug. --- net/key/af_key.c |1 - 1 files changed, 1 deletion(-) diff -puN net/key/af_key.c~bugfix net/key/af_key.c --- linux-2.6.15/net/key/af_key.c~bugfix2006-01-17 19:47:20.280890504 -0500 +++ linux-2.6.15-cxzhang/net/key/af_key.c 2006