On 30/08/17 04:24, Cong Wang wrote: > On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 12:02 PM, Nikolay Aleksandrov > <niko...@cumulusnetworks.com> wrote: >> First I did it with the check in the for () conditional, but this is more >> visible and explicit. Let me know if you'd like the shorter version. :-) > > Or, if you want to make the patch size smaller, just check NULL > before for(): > > if (!q->hh_flows) > return; > > for (...) > > Up to you, I have no strong opinion here, slightly prefer a smaller > one for backport. >
Sure, either one is fine with me too. Since I'll be resubmitting these in a set I'll use the smaller version for this one. Thanks, Nik
