[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200804163537.0ec908ae@elisabeth>
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 16:35:37 +0200
From: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@...hat.com>
To: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>, Aaron Conole <aconole@...hat.com>,
Numan Siddique <nusiddiq@...hat.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Pravin B Shelar <pshelar@....org>,
Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>,
Lourdes Pedrajas <lu@...o.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 5/6] selftests: pmtu.sh: Add tests for
bridged UDP tunnels
On Tue, 4 Aug 2020 08:00:19 -0600
David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com> wrote:
> On 8/3/20 11:53 PM, Stefano Brivio wrote:
> > @@ -497,12 +529,19 @@ setup_vxlan_or_geneve() {
> > run_cmd ${ns_a} ip link add ${type}_a type ${type} id 1 ${opts_a} remote ${b_addr} ${opts} || return 1
> > run_cmd ${ns_b} ip link add ${type}_b type ${type} id 1 ${opts_b} remote ${a_addr} ${opts}
> >
> > - run_cmd ${ns_a} ip addr add ${tunnel4_a_addr}/${tunnel4_mask} dev ${type}_a
> > - run_cmd ${ns_b} ip addr add ${tunnel4_b_addr}/${tunnel4_mask} dev ${type}_b
> > + if [ -n "${br_if_a}" ]; then
> > + run_cmd ${ns_a} ip addr add ${tunnel4_a_addr}/${tunnel4_mask} dev ${br_if_a}
> > + run_cmd ${ns_a} ip addr add ${tunnel6_a_addr}/${tunnel6_mask} dev ${br_if_a}
> > + run_cmd ${ns_a} ip link set ${type}_a master ${br_if_a}
> > + else
> > + run_cmd ${ns_a} ip addr add ${tunnel4_a_addr}/${tunnel4_mask} dev ${type}_a
> > + run_cmd ${ns_a} ip addr add ${tunnel6_a_addr}/${tunnel6_mask} dev ${type}_a
> > + fi
> >
> > - run_cmd ${ns_a} ip addr add ${tunnel6_a_addr}/${tunnel6_mask} dev ${type}_a
> > + run_cmd ${ns_b} ip addr add ${tunnel4_b_addr}/${tunnel4_mask} dev ${type}_b
> > run_cmd ${ns_b} ip addr add ${tunnel6_b_addr}/${tunnel6_mask} dev ${type}_b
> >
> > +
>
> extra newline snuck in
Hm, that was actually intentional because in this function now we
(mostly) have:
do something with a
do something with b
# something else I don't focus on at a glance
do something with a
do something with b
# do something with a here? No, on the next line.
# do something with b
But now that you mention it, I see it might be a questionable practice,
and I guess we could drop it.
> other than that:
> Reviewed-by: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
Dave, let me know if I should resend the series. Thanks.
--
Stefano
Powered by blists - more mailing lists