Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On 1/4/2010 5:59, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> [sorry for the late response, just got back from a good holiday, which
> means no work email access ;-) ]
>> Simon Horman wrote:
>>> I agree with Julian's assessment that your patch shouldn't be
>>> necessary, but on the other hand I think that the checks are
>>> reasonable. Your original patch made checks of the form of
>>> "cmd> IP_VS_SO_GET_MAX + 1". I have updated this to
>>> "cmd> IP_VS_SO_GET_MAX", as suggested by Julian, as the optmax
>>> elements of struct nf_sockopt_ops set a non-inclusive range.
>>> Index: net-next-2.6/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_ctl.c
>> As a bugfix, this seems more appropriate for net-2.6.git. Please let
>> me know which tree you want me to apply this to.
> this really ought to go into 2.6.33.....
Thanks, applied and will send it upstream soon.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html