Mike Belopuhov wrote:
> On 27 February 2016 at 08:21, Michael McConville wrote:
> > Michael McConville wrote:
> >> Michael McConville wrote:
> >> > Does this make sense?
> >>
> >> I just realized that the allocation failure checks earlier in the
> >> function return ENOBUFS.
On 27 February 2016 at 08:21, Michael McConville wrote:
> Michael McConville wrote:
>> Michael McConville wrote:
>> > Does this make sense?
>>
>> I just realized that the allocation failure checks earlier in the
>> function return ENOBUFS. This probably makes more sense for the
Michael McConville wrote:
> Michael McConville wrote:
> > Does this make sense?
>
> I just realized that the allocation failure checks earlier in the
> function return ENOBUFS. This probably makes more sense for the sake of
> consistency.
The best I can tell, the only use of this function is in
Michael McConville wrote:
> Does this make sense?
I just realized that the allocation failure checks earlier in the
function return ENOBUFS. This probably makes more sense for the sake of
consistency.
> Index: sys/crypto/cryptosoft.c
>
Does this make sense?
Index: sys/crypto/cryptosoft.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/crypto/cryptosoft.c,v
retrieving revision 1.80
diff -u -p -r1.80 cryptosoft.c
--- sys/crypto/cryptosoft.c 10 Dec 2015 21:00:51 - 1.80
+++