Patrick McHardy wrote: >> Would you be OK with something like: >> >> BUG_ON(notify != new); >> >> So we can catch this very unlikely bug, if so. > > Sure. We don't do this is 99% of the other unregistration functions > however, so I don't think its particulary useful. It only affects > out of tree code anyways, unless we've done something really stupid, > like remove error checking in the initialization function :) I see. Well, I don't have very strong arguments to support this, some of them: if I remove it the unregistration function will not use the parameter anymore and I'd like to keep the register/unregister interface symmetric. Very unlikely but it can spot other problems like memory corruptions? Although in that case, the kernel is more likely to crash. Please, keep it there :). I'm going to send you a new version of this patch to the mailing list. -- "Los honestos son inadaptados sociales" -- Les Luthiers -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
