Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 13 Mar 2014 07:14:40 +0400
From:      Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org>
To:        John-Mark Gurney <jmg@funkthat.com>
Cc:        svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r263091 - in head/sys: netinet netinet6
Message-ID:  <20140313031440.GR80022@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <20140312221955.GC32089@funkthat.com>
References:  <201403121429.s2CET8Hh038762@svn.freebsd.org> <20140312221955.GC32089@funkthat.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 03:19:55PM -0700, John-Mark Gurney wrote:
J> > Log:
J> >   Since both netinet/ and netinet6/ call into netipsec/ and netpfil/,
J> >   the protocol specific mbuf flags are shared between them.
J> >   
J> >   - Move all M_FOO definitions into a single place: netinet/in6.h, to
J> >     avoid future  clashes.
J> >   - Resolve clash between M_DECRYPTED and M_SKIP_FIREWALL which resulted
J> >     in a failure of operation of IPSEC and packet filters.
J> >   
J> >   Thanks to Nicolas and Georgios for all the hard work on bisecting,
J> >   testing and finally finding the root of the problem.
J> >   
J> >   PR:			kern/186755
J> >   PR:			kern/185876
J> >   In collaboration with:	Georgios Amanakis <gamanakis gmail.com>
J> >   In collaboration with:	Nicolas DEFFAYET <nicolas-ml deffayet.com>
J> >   Sponsored by:		Nginx, Inc.
J> 
J> Was the version bumped so that old kernel modules won't cause issues w/
J> the new numbering?

You are probably right. But since I'm going to checkin another ABI breaker
soon, we will piggyback on that bump.

-- 
Totus tuus, Glebius.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140313031440.GR80022>