Re: wm_intr may lead wm_start unexpectedly

[Ryota Ozaki <ozaki-r%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Ryota Ozaki <ozaki-r%netbsd.org@localhost> 
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 10:58 PM, Ryota Ozaki <ozaki-r%netbsd.org@localhost> 
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 6:57 PM, Manuel Bouyer 
>> <bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 06:51:06PM +0900, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
>>>> >> Any comments?
>>>> >
>>>> > why not change in6_if_link_up() to use a delay >= 1 instead of 0 ?
>>>>
>>>> My change intends to make it clear whether a callout will be used
>>>> or not. I think it's error-prone.
>>>
>>> for me, it's clear that a timeout of 0 means immediately, and so a
>>> callout is not needed. I wouldn't expect a timeout of 0 to run through
>>> a callout. I would also expect a negative timeout to either be EINVAL or
>>> equivalent to 0.
>>
>> Hmm, we have different feelings :-|
>>
>> Anyway I don't so stick to my approach. I just want to fix the problem
>> and avoid further abuse of the function somehow.
>>
>> So changing delay >= 1 and adding some caveat about its behavior
>> to nd6_dad_start would be okay.
>
> So the patch is here: http://netbsd.org/~ozaki-r/nd6_dad_start.diff

I'll commit this soon if there is no objection.

Thanks,
  ozaki-r

>
> Regards,
>   ozaki-r
>
>>
>>   ozaki-r
>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Manuel Bouyer <bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost>
>>>      NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference
>>> --