On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 07:57:00PM +0200, Vincent Gross wrote:
> On 09/18/15 23:39, David Hill wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 11:05:55PM +0200, Vincent Gross wrote:
> >> On 09/18/15 15:18, David Hill wrote:
> >>> Is this 'if (count)' statement needed? We know first > last, so count
> >>> will
On 09/18/15 23:39, David Hill wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 11:05:55PM +0200, Vincent Gross wrote:
>> On 09/18/15 15:18, David Hill wrote:
>>> Is this 'if (count)' statement needed? We know first > last, so count
>>> will always be positive. lastport will always be set.
>>
>>> if last == first
On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 11:05:55PM +0200, Vincent Gross wrote:
> On 09/18/15 15:18, David Hill wrote:
> > Is this 'if (count)' statement needed? We know first > last, so count
> > will always be positive. lastport will always be set.
>
> > if last == first, then the if statement will be false an
On 09/18/15 15:18, David Hill wrote:
> Is this 'if (count)' statement needed? We know first > last, so count
> will always be positive. lastport will always be set.
> if last == first, then the if statement will be false and lastport will
> be uninitialized, I believe.
>
Both remarks are true,
On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 11:49:45AM +0200, Vincent Gross wrote:
> On 09/13/15 10:37, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 12:18:10AM +0200, Vincent Gross wrote:
> >> On 09/12/15 22:10, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> >>> On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 02:40:59PM +0200, Vincent Gross wrote:
> inpt_l
On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 02:58:40PM +0200, Vincent Gross wrote:
> On 09/13/15 11:49, Vincent Gross wrote:
> > On 09/13/15 10:37, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> >> On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 12:18:10AM +0200, Vincent Gross wrote:
> >>> On 09/12/15 22:10, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 02:40
On 09/13/15 11:49, Vincent Gross wrote:
> On 09/13/15 10:37, Claudio Jeker wrote:
>> On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 12:18:10AM +0200, Vincent Gross wrote:
>>> On 09/12/15 22:10, Claudio Jeker wrote:
On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 02:40:59PM +0200, Vincent Gross wrote:
> inpt_lastport is never read witho
On 09/13/15 10:37, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 12:18:10AM +0200, Vincent Gross wrote:
>> On 09/12/15 22:10, Claudio Jeker wrote:
>>> On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 02:40:59PM +0200, Vincent Gross wrote:
inpt_lastport is never read without being written before, and only
in_pcbb
On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 12:18:10AM +0200, Vincent Gross wrote:
> On 09/12/15 22:10, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 02:40:59PM +0200, Vincent Gross wrote:
> >> inpt_lastport is never read without being written before, and only
> >> in_pcbbind()
> >> and in6_pcbsetport() are using i
On 09/12/15 22:10, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 02:40:59PM +0200, Vincent Gross wrote:
>> inpt_lastport is never read without being written before, and only
>> in_pcbbind()
>> and in6_pcbsetport() are using it. This diff removes inpt_lastport from
>> struct inpcbtable and turns it
On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 02:40:59PM +0200, Vincent Gross wrote:
> inpt_lastport is never read without being written before, and only
> in_pcbbind()
> and in6_pcbsetport() are using it. This diff removes inpt_lastport from
> struct inpcbtable and turns it into a local variable where it is used.
>
>
inpt_lastport is never read without being written before, and only
in_pcbbind()
and in6_pcbsetport() are using it. This diff removes inpt_lastport from
struct inpcbtable and turns it into a local variable where it is used.
Ok ?
--
Vincent
Index: sys/netinet/in_pcb.c
=
12 matches
Mail list logo
