Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] [RTNETLINK] Fix RTM_MAX to represent the maximum valid message type

From: Thomas Graf <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 01:02:17 +0200

* David S. Miller <[email-masked]> 2005-05-03 15:27
> On Wed, 4 May 2005 00:20:03 +0200
> Thomas Graf <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> > * David S. Miller <[email-masked]> 2005-05-03 14:27
> > > Excellent observation.  The fact that we encode the "modifies state"
> > > in the low bits of the RTM_* numbers has always been a source of
> > > obscure bugs and hard to track down errors.
> > > 
> > > Patch applied, thanks.
> > 
> > Do you want 2.4 backports for all patches or just the xfrm
> > off-by-one fix?
> 
> Congratulations if you can find xfrm in the vanilla
> 2.4.x tree :-)

Heh, ok ok ;-> I think none of the patches need to be backported
then, although the type > RTM_MAX has an off-by-one issue the
current RTM_MAX is set to one below the start of the next block
so the behaviour matches the 2.6 tree.