From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 479D5C433F5 for ; Sun, 28 Nov 2021 13:11:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233604AbhK1NPA (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Nov 2021 08:15:00 -0500 Received: from new1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.221]:52567 "EHLO new1-smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S236398AbhK1NM6 (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Nov 2021 08:12:58 -0500 Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailnew.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AB1A580367; Sun, 28 Nov 2021 08:09:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 28 Nov 2021 08:09:42 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=IXzF23 awY0KdzU5MgQz9zPwiFr04JG1XhZuChJTmCZQ=; b=nKssalVhvN+7uF1sbfed7P A5T11HFa1cnA0kWJztHGAv1CCBpTRk0VqCHELOxn10m3PejKq2O3aDzofM/j3wlo VO6HHXx+Ro+0McHJpot3t9ftrgkD/CX6HESeXZUv9wg3CFZRALC+dYl7MqEUbGcR g7Ikyl5YQPTZAe02ya6YUTS5L4o97BGEE9pkBylAqJFJmzZ4bt0FPCpPP5W8EdhU 99iBFJHr8Ro8+JDxUL/fwVInjGEVoJHQANt3e9Fm403lz8XRWpLD5LQdrBZWTloM 33RCH6+GC5vGOKxhBBGUejGISqz6NZOTxThUDi30BuqVKEfO6H9Bio4r7gL1cEGg == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvuddrheeigdehtdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpeffhffvuffkfhggtggujgesthdtredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepkfguohcuufgt hhhimhhmvghluceoihguohhstghhsehiughoshgthhdrohhrgheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvg hrnhepgfevgfevueduueffieffheeifffgjeelvedtteeuteeuffekvefggfdtudfgkeev necuffhomhgrihhnpehkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrghenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtne curfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehiughoshgthhesihguohhstghhrdhorhhg X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Sun, 28 Nov 2021 08:09:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2021 15:09:38 +0200 From: Ido Schimmel To: Alexander Mikhalitsyn Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, David Miller , David Ahern , Stephen Hemminger , Ido Schimmel , Jakub Kicinski , Roopa Prabhu , Andrei Vagin , Pavel Tikhomirov , Alexander Mikhalitsyn Subject: Re: [PATCH iproute2] ip route: save: exclude rtnh_flags which can't be set Message-ID: References: <20211111160240.739294-1-alexander.mikhalitsyn@virtuozzo.com> <20211126134311.920808-1-alexander.mikhalitsyn@virtuozzo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20211126134311.920808-1-alexander.mikhalitsyn@virtuozzo.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Nov 26, 2021 at 04:43:10PM +0300, Alexander Mikhalitsyn wrote: > + /* > + * Exclude flags which can't be set directly > + * by the userspace from the rtmsg dump. > + */ I believe iproute2 is following netdev style comments [1] so this should be: /* Exclude flags which can't be set directly * by the userspace from the rtmsg dump. */ At least it's consistent with other comments in the file. [1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v5.12/networking/netdev-FAQ.html#is-the-comment-style-convention-different-for-the-networking-content > + r->rtm_flags &= ~RTNH_REJECT_MASK; > + > ret = write(STDOUT_FILENO, n, n->nlmsg_len); > if ((ret > 0) && (ret != n->nlmsg_len)) { > fprintf(stderr, "Short write while saving nlmsg\n"); > -- > 2.31.1 >