2018-07-09 22:48 GMT+09:00 Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 11:40:06PM +0900, Taehee Yoo wrote: >> 2018-07-03 19:20 GMT+09:00 Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: >> > On Sun, Jul 01, 2018 at 08:44:52PM +0900, Taehee Yoo wrote: >> >> This patch fixes below. >> >> 1. check null pointer of rb_next. >> >> rb_next can return null. so null check routine should be added. >> >> 2. check whether an interval flags is set or not. >> >> If interval flags is given, both a start node and a end node >> >> should be removed at once. If interval flags it not given, >> >> is doesn't matter. >> > >> >> Thank you for reviewing! >> >> > For #2, I would prefer we reject rbtree for single elements. I'm going >> > to send a patch for this. >> > >> > Would you rebase 1. and 3. on top? >> > >> > Thanks! >> > >> >> Of course! >> Do you mean that the 'top' is current top? or next top? > > I mean, on top of this one: > > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/940650/ > > which makes sure we cannot use the interval set with single elements, > which I understand is one of the problems this patch is addressing. > > Thanks. Thanks for letting me know I understood Thanks -- 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
