[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAE3RKNkB2d3=cMOGz2ogfawo+tm4CimTc+hHXtFYpZ+wAzsAVA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 07:39:43 +0200
From: Veaceslav Falico <darkmag@...il.com>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Cc: netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 08/27] bonding: remove bond_for_each_slave_reverse()
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 3:53 AM, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Sep 2013 at 20:57 GMT, Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...hat.com> wrote:
>> We only use it in rollback scenarios and can easily use the standart
>> bond_for_each_dev() instead.
>>
>
> What you remove actually is bond_for_each_slave_continue_reverse()...
> $subject needs to be fixed.
Indeed, thank you, will fix :).
>
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c
>> index c3dcc6b..46f6b40 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c
>> @@ -1246,9 +1246,9 @@ static int alb_handle_addr_collision_on_attach(struct bonding *bond, struct slav
>> */
>> static int alb_set_mac_address(struct bonding *bond, void *addr)
>> {
>> - char tmp_addr[ETH_ALEN];
>> - struct slave *slave;
>> + struct slave *slave, *rollback_slave;
>> struct sockaddr sa;
>> + char tmp_addr[ETH_ALEN];
>
> Why are you moving tmp_addr[]?
It's more readable, IMO, if structs go first.
--
Best regards,
Veaceslav Falico
--
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