Hi Matt,
I’m glad the change is not a problem for you.
The trouble with passing partial rather than full information in the update, is
that I cannot always tell what’s being updated. Consider the 3 phase re-key,
the user is adding another receive SA, how can I tell if that’s the addition of
a
> On 27 May 2019, at 13:54, Vratko Polak -X (vrpolak - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at
> Cisco) via Lists.Fd.Io wrote:
>
> SemVer says:
> > Patch version Z (x.y.Z | x > 0) MUST be incremented if only backwards
> > compatible bug fixes are introduced.
> > A bug fix is defined as an internal change th
SemVer says:
> Patch version Z (x.y.Z | x > 0) MUST be incremented if only backwards
> compatible bug fixes are introduced.
> A bug fix is defined as an internal change that fixes incorrect behavior.
That means API version should be bumped even if the change
only affects the implementation (and n
No luck.
Tried with your suggested change, still getting the same.
Regards,
Siddarth
On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 2:07 PM Damjan Marion wrote:
> Can you try to replace:
>
> format_vlib_pci_vpd, d->vpd_r, 0);
>
> with
>
> format_vlib_pci_vpd, d->vpd_r, NULL);
>
> in show_pci_fn() - src/vlib/pci/pci.c
