lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Aug]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch net-next 01/16] net: introduce upper device lists
On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 14:24:33 +0200
Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us> wrote:

> Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 07:52:17PM CEST, fbl@redhat.com wrote:
> >On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 17:27:00 +0200
> >Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us> wrote:
> >> + /*
> >> + * To prevent loops, check if dev is not upper device to upper_dev.
> >> + */
> >> + if (__netdev_has_upper_dev(upper_dev, dev, true))
> >> + return -EBUSY;
> >> +
> >> + if (__netdev_find_upper(dev, upper_dev))
> >> + return -EEXIST;
> >
> >__netdev_has_upper_dev() can go all the way up finding the device and
> >the __netdev_find_upper() just check the first level.
>
>
> I do not think this ordering is somewhat inportant.

it's not the order, see below:

> >I think it would be better to use:
> >__netdev_find_upper_dev(,,deep=true/false)
> >__netdev_has_upper(,)

It's their names. Currently, the function ..._find_... look at
one level only, while the function ..._has_... does one or more
levels. I think it's better to swap 'has' and 'find' in their names:

__netdev_find_upper_dev(,,deep=true/false) <-- find in all levels
__netdev_has_upper(,) <-- check only the one level.

fbl


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-08-14 16:03    [W:0.059 / U:0.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site