On Sat, Jun 02, 2012 at 09:52:13AM +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > On Sat, 2 Jun 2012 09:45:27 +0900 > Simon Horman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Sat, Jun 02, 2012 at 05:38:53AM +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > >> We use OFPT_* names for class names. So 'OFPGetConfigReply' looks more > >> appropriate for OFPT_GET_CONFIG_REPLY. > > > > Hi Fujita-san, > > > > is it also appropriate to rename OFP_SWITCH_CONFIG_PACK_STR ? > > Not sure. OFP_SWITCH_CONFIG_PACK_STR is used by OFPT_GET_CONFIG_REPLY > and OFPT_SET_CONFIG. OFP_CONFIG_PACK? I guess that it's too generic.
Good point, in that case I think the current name is fine. Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <[email protected]> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Ryu-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ryu-devel
