[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110305145408.GD8573@psychotron.redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 15:54:09 +0100
From: Jiri Pirko <jpirko@...hat.com>
To: Nicolas de Pesloüan
<nicolas.2p.debian@...il.com>
Cc: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
davem@...emloft.net, shemminger@...ux-foundation.org,
kaber@...sh.net, fubar@...ibm.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
andy@...yhouse.net
Subject: Re: [patch net-next-2.6 7/8] net: introduce rx_handler results and
logic around that
Sat, Mar 05, 2011 at 03:52:19PM CET, nicolas.2p.debian@...il.com wrote:
>Le 05/03/2011 13:48, Ben Hutchings a écrit :
>>On Sat, 2011-03-05 at 11:29 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>>This patch allows rx_handlers to better signalize what to do next to
>>>it's caller. That makes skb->deliver_no_wcard no longer needed.
>>[...]
>>>--- a/include/linux/netdevice.h
>>>+++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h
>>>@@ -390,7 +390,14 @@ enum gro_result {
>>> };
>>> typedef enum gro_result gro_result_t;
>>>
>>>-typedef struct sk_buff *rx_handler_func_t(struct sk_buff *skb);
>>>+enum rx_handler_result {
>>>+ RX_HANDLER_CONSUMED,
>>>+ RX_HANDLER_ANOTHER,
>>>+ RX_HANDLER_EXACT,
>>>+ RX_HANDLER_PASS,
>>>+};
>>[...]
>>
>>This should have a comment (preferably kernel-doc) clearly specifying
>>the meaning of each code, as the differences between ANOTHER/EXACT/PASS
>>are fairly subtle.
>>
>>Ben,
>
>Except from the lack of proper documentation, this patch looks very good.
Okay guys, I'll write something about that and send it in another patch.
>
> Nicolas.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists