Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 12:00:14 GMT From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: kern/145462 Message-ID: <201004131200.o3DC0ElS066762@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR kern/145462; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org>
To: Aleksey <otim@mail.ru>
Cc: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: kern/145462
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 15:36:58 +0400
IMO, this patch would be better:
Index: ng_ipfw.c
===================================================================
--- ng_ipfw.c (revision 206495)
+++ ng_ipfw.c (working copy)
@@ -264,11 +264,8 @@
* Node must be loaded and corresponding hook must be present.
*/
if (fw_node == NULL ||
- (hook = ng_ipfw_findhook1(fw_node, fwa->rule.info)) == NULL) {
- if (tee == 0)
- m_freem(*m0);
+ (hook = ng_ipfw_findhook1(fw_node, fwa->rule.info)) == NULL)
return (ESRCH); /* no hook associated with this rule */
- }
/*
* We have two modes: in normal mode we add a tag to packet, which is
Can you please test it and if you don't mind I will commit it.
--
Totus tuus, Glebius.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201004131200.o3DC0ElS066762>