On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 06:45:50PM EDT, Keller, Jacob E wrote: >> + >> +int unicast_client_unicast_master_table_received(struct port *p, struct >> ptp_message *m) >> +{ >> + struct unicast_master_address *ucma; >> + >> + if (!unicast_client_enabled(p)) { >> + return 0; >> + } >> + STAILQ_FOREACH(ucma, &p->unicast_master_table->addrs, list) { >> + if (addreq(transport_type(p->trp), &ucma->address, &m- >> >address)) { >> + break; >> + } >> + } > >Does STALQ_FOREACH guarantee that ucma is NULL after exiting? > >For code clarity I'd rather have a separate variable set set to 1 when addreq >returns true. That is far easier to read, since not every for each iterator >works this way. > >> + return ucma ? 1 : 0; >> +}
Thanks. Fixed in next v3 patch. >> + >> diff --git a/unicast_client.h b/unicast_client.h >> index 16e291f..b24c4eb 100644 >> --- a/unicast_client.h >> +++ b/unicast_client.h >> @@ -82,4 +82,15 @@ void unicast_client_state_changed(struct port *p); >> */ >> int unicast_client_timer(struct port *p); >> >> +/** >> + * Check whether a message was received from an entry in the unicast >> + * master table. >> + * @param p The port in question. >> + * @param m The message in question. >> + * @return One (1) if the message is from an entry in the unicast >> + * master table, or zero otherwise. >> + */ >> +int unicast_client_unicast_master_table_received(struct port *p, >> + struct ptp_message *m); >> + >> #endif > >The name of the function doesn't quite capture its meaning to me. > >Perhaps something like "unicast_message_is_from_master_table_entry"? > >I'm ok with the name if Richard is, but thought I'd voice my bikeshed opinion. Changed to unicast_client_msg_is_from_master_table_entry() in v3 patch. The unicast_client prefix is to keep with existing naming in the file. Thanks, Vincent _______________________________________________ Linuxptp-devel mailing list Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel