From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Aug 16 5:36:27 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FF3937B401; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 05:36:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.fokus.gmd.de (mailhub.fokus.gmd.de [193.174.154.14]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0D9743E6E; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 05:36:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brandt@fokus.gmd.de) Received: from beagle (beagle [193.175.132.100]) by mailhub.fokus.gmd.de (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7GCaF204836; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 14:36:15 +0200 (MEST) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 14:36:15 +0200 (CEST) From: Harti Brandt To: Maxim Sobolev Cc: Bruce Evans , Maxim Sobolev , , Subject: Re: Increasing size of if_flags field in the ifnet structure [patch In-Reply-To: <200208161211.g7GCBDrL005351@vega.vega.com> Message-ID: <20020816143437.D24938-100000@beagle.fokus.gmd.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, 16 Aug 2002, Maxim Sobolev wrote: MS>BTW, I've just realised that we can easily avoid breaking application MS>ABI by using currently unused ifr_ifru.ifru_flags[2] (aka. ifr_prevflags) MS>for storing another 16 flags. What do people think? The ifr_prevflags may be used by snmp daemons to provide the necessary atomic rollback. harti -- harti brandt, http://www.fokus.gmd.de/research/cc/cats/employees/hartmut.brandt/private brandt@fokus.gmd.de, brandt@fokus.fhg.de To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message