From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 1 15:20:01 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@smarthost.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 259D2BA4 for ; Thu, 1 May 2014 15:20:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 12BF116E6 for ; Thu, 1 May 2014 15:20:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.8/8.14.8) with ESMTP id s41FK0TM095784 for ; Thu, 1 May 2014 15:20:00 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.8/8.14.8/Submit) id s41FK0ID095782; Thu, 1 May 2014 15:20:00 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 15:20:00 GMT Message-Id: <201405011520.s41FK0ID095782@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org Cc: From: "Alexander V. Chernikov" Subject: Re: kern/174958: [net] [patch] rnh_walktree_from makes unreasonable assumptions X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list Reply-To: "Alexander V. Chernikov" List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 May 2014 15:20:01 -0000 The following reply was made to PR kern/174958; it has been noted by GNATS. From: "Alexander V. Chernikov" To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, sklower@cs.berkeley.edu Cc: Subject: Re: kern/174958: [net] [patch] rnh_walktree_from makes unreasonable assumptions Date: Thu, 01 May 2014 19:18:41 +0400 Hello! Better late than never. I'm a bit unsure how patch&test case in this PR relates to kern/174959. Problems described here are the same as in 174959, however it looks like given patch addresses some other problem. It does not touch problem function at all, but introduces a bunch of new ones not used in test case. Can you please provide some more details?