Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] ipv6: fixup RTF_* flags when restoring RTPROT_RA route from rtnetlink

Hello.

On 8/22/2016 2:04 PM, Andrew Yourtchenko wrote:

quoted

quoted

Fix the flags for RA-derived routes that were saved
via "ip -6 route save" and and subsequently restored via
"ip -6 route restore", allowing the incoming router advertisements
to update them, rather than complain about inability to do so.

Upon the restore of RA-derived saved routes, set the RTF_ADDRCONF
to indicate that the source of the route was originally
a router advertisement, and set the RTF_DEFAULT or RTF_ROUTEINFO
flag depending on prefix length. This can be considered a
sister change of f0396f60d7c165018c9b203fb9b89fb224835578, in

   It's enough to specify 12 digits but you also need to specify the commit
summary enclosed in ("").

Is just the first line of "ipv6: fix RTPROT_RA markup of RA routes
w/nexthops" enough, or do I need to include the additional two

   Summary means the patch subject (and the first line of the commit log).

paragraphs that follow ? (and can I keep the full hash rather than
truncate down to 12 digits?)

   Yes.

quoted

quoted

the other direction.

Signed-off-by: Andrew Yourtchenko <redacted>

[...]

MBR, Sergei