Summary of an offline conversation: I used int for the ifi_flags because that was the precedent in netdev-linux.c. I agree that using unsigned int is preferable, but it makes the patches a bit less clean. I'm going to merge them as is (except changing rtnetlink-link.h), and send out a patch which transitions to unsigned int.
Ethan On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 13:41, Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 07:07:32PM -0800, Ethan Jackson wrote: >> Before this patch, every request for a 'netdev_dev''s flags >> required an ioctl call. This occurred every time >> netdev_get_carrier() was called, which theoretically was very often >> if there were a large number of devices. We were already using >> netlink to keep track of the IFF_RUNNING flag. This patch >> generalizes the code to keep track of all flags using the same >> netlink code. >> >> Signed-off-by: Ethan Jackson <[email protected]> > > Looks good to me. Thank you! > > Only comment is that I think "unsigned int" is better for ifi_flags. > > Thanks, > > Ben. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
