[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5652ECD7.1000104@cumulusnetworks.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 11:39:19 +0100
From: Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>
To: Cong Wang <cwang@...pensource.com>,
Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@...ckwall.org>
Cc: netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/9] net: ipmr: always define
mroute_reg_vif_num
On 11/23/2015 06:23 AM, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 6:57 AM, Nikolay Aleksandrov
> <razor@...ckwall.org> wrote:
>> From: Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>
>>
>> Before mroute_reg_vif_num was defined only if any of the CONFIG_PIMSM_
>> options were set, but that's not really necessary as the size of the
>> struct is the same in both cases (checked with pahole, both cases size
>> is 3256 bytes) and we can remove some unnecessary ifdefs to simplify the
>> code.
>>
>
> Not sure if this really simplifies the code, since now
> mroute_reg_vif_num is hidden
> deeper after your patch and there are still some code under CONFIG_IP_PIMSM.
>
CONFIG_IP_PIMSM is removed in the next patch, and it's not "hidden" anymore
than it was before.
> If you really care about it, how about introducing a helper function
> to set and get
> mrt->mroute_reg_vif_num?
>
Patches are welcome, if you don't get to it then I will with the next
set.
--
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