Hi Patrik,
Thank you for the time you spent on my patches. 2015-10-19 14:16 GMT+02:00 Patrik Flykt <patrik.fl...@linux.intel.com>: > > Hi, > > On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 08:37 +0200, Mylene JOSSERAND wrote: > > This is a first patch of a serie to implement a simultaneous APNs > context activation. > > > > The current commit removes the previous implementation of one context > per modem and > > adds a list of contexts instead. > > As this patch is really quite long, it looks it would be possible to add > GSList *context_list without removing struct network_context *context > immediately. So the code would function as before, but the contexts are > added/removed to/from the list. The next patch could then remove struct > network_context *context and change the functionality to always use the > list. > okay, I understand, I did not see this "kind" of patch splitting. I will do so. > Instead of looking up the context with g_slist_nth_data and a > context_id, can't the code simply pass around a struct network_context * > all the time? For example in network_connect() the corresponding call > would then look like 'context_set_active(modem, context, TRUE)'. It's > much simpler that way and avoids iterating over the list twice. Right > now it is not immediately clear what a context_id with values 0 or -1 > means. > You are right, thank you for pointing it. > > Also, if you have a singly-linked list, please always prepend items as > the appending function has to always reach the end of the list before an > item is added. Since the order makes no difference here, prepeding is a > much more elegant (and faster) solution. > Indeed, I will use the prepending function, thank you for the tips. > > > Some modifications are necessary : some properties in the modem > structure are moved > > to the context structure (such as connman_network, valid_apn, etc) as > they are properties > > specifics to context. > > Ok. > > > Some functions are implemented to search for a specific context in the > list by his path > > or by his network. A function to remove all the context of one modem > > is also implemented. > > Yes, those need to be implemented. The other two patches are really nice > and small. > > Cool ! I will send a second version (maybe, directly with PATCH flag and not RFC ?) with these corrections. Best regards, Mylene JOSSERAND _______________________________________________ connman mailing list connman@connman.net https://lists.connman.net/mailman/listinfo/connman
