James Carlson wrote:

>Darren Reed writes:
>  
>
>>Whilst experimenting, I ran across a few trivial bugs that I've
>>fixed along the way...of these 4, one is still pending acceptance:
>>6678354.  Does anyone have any thoughts on this problem or
>>other ways in which it should be fixed?
>>    
>>
>
>Please make sure that you're listed as the RE on all of the bugs,
>you've got a filled out 'Evaluation' field, and the state is
>'fix-in-progress.'
>  
>

Yup, I'll do that...I suppose it's ok for me to "accept" 6678354 myself?

>>If someone has some time to code review this, please look at:
>>http://cr.opensolaris.org/~darrenr/biscuit_onnv_6678274-20080325/
>>    
>>
>
>revarp.c
>
>  374: this return leaks the 'dh' handle.  (Since this rarely happens,
>  couldn't this just be another test near line 386?)
>  
>

I had a think about this...
The concern was whether the early return saved on a possible
error from dlpi_info().  Given the nature of what I observed,
"ether ff", it's clear that this isn't a concern, so I'm happy to
merge the check into line 386.


>ifconfig.c
>
>  2884: while you're here doing cosmetic stuff, lifr_metric isn't
>  right.  This should be lifr_mtu.  (Cut-n-paste, I guess.)
>  
>

Yup.

Thanks,
Darren

_______________________________________________
networking-discuss mailing list
[email protected]

Reply via email to