Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 12:00:14 GMT From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: kern/145462 Message-ID: <201004131200.o3DC0ElS066762@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR kern/145462; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> To: Aleksey <otim@mail.ru> Cc: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: kern/145462 Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 15:36:58 +0400 IMO, this patch would be better: Index: ng_ipfw.c =================================================================== --- ng_ipfw.c (revision 206495) +++ ng_ipfw.c (working copy) @@ -264,11 +264,8 @@ * Node must be loaded and corresponding hook must be present. */ if (fw_node == NULL || - (hook = ng_ipfw_findhook1(fw_node, fwa->rule.info)) == NULL) { - if (tee == 0) - m_freem(*m0); + (hook = ng_ipfw_findhook1(fw_node, fwa->rule.info)) == NULL) return (ESRCH); /* no hook associated with this rule */ - } /* * We have two modes: in normal mode we add a tag to packet, which is Can you please test it and if you don't mind I will commit it. -- Totus tuus, Glebius.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201004131200.o3DC0ElS066762>