Le 30/05/2016 18:01, Vincent Bernat a écrit :
>  ❦ 30 mai 2016 17:58 CEST, Vincent Bernat <vinc...@bernat.im> :
> 
>> +
>> +    rtmsg_ifinfo(RTM_NEWLINK, peer, IFF_SLAVE, GFP_KERNEL);
> 
> Maybe ~0U would be better than hijacking IFF_SLAVE?
IFF_SLAVE is wrong. It's a flag here, that will be put in the ifi_change field
not an attribute number.

Reply via email to