On 9/1/15 12:39 PM, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:
On Sep 1, 2015, at 11:25 AM, David Ahern wrote:
for net-next. Forgot to add to subject line. (Thanks, Roopa, for the reminder.)
On 9/1/15 12:18 PM, David Ahern wrote:
A number of VRF patches used 'int' for table id. It should be u32 to be
consi
> On Sep 1, 2015, at 11:25 AM, David Ahern wrote:
>
> for net-next. Forgot to add to subject line. (Thanks, Roopa, for the
> reminder.)
>
> On 9/1/15 12:18 PM, David Ahern wrote:
>> A number of VRF patches used 'int' for table id. It should be u32 to be
>> consistent with the rest of the stack
for net-next. Forgot to add to subject line. (Thanks, Roopa, for the
reminder.)
On 9/1/15 12:18 PM, David Ahern wrote:
A number of VRF patches used 'int' for table id. It should be u32 to be
consistent with the rest of the stack.
Fixes:
4e3c89920cd3a ("net: Introduce VRF related flags and help
