On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 11:19:42PM -0700, Justin Pettit wrote:
> On May 7, 2012, at 5:11 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> 
> > I noticed one more thing.  ofp_print_switch_features() sorts the ports
> > that it prints by port number.  It might be nice for
> > ofp_print_ofpst_port_desc_reply() to do the same.  Sure, it wouldn't
> > be globally sorted, only within a single reply message, but that still
> > might help to make the output more readable.  And it would definitely
> > make single-message replies more readable.
> 
> 
> I thought about that, but since it wasn't going to be globally sorted,
> I decided to skip it.  However, having that many ports is unusual, so
> we may as well make the common case pretty.  There's an incremental at
> the end of this message.  

Thanks.

I'd add a new-line before the first port, so that the formatting looks
the same for each port.

> If we want to be consistent, we should probably do something similar
> for "dump-ports", since those aren't sorted.

It's a good idea.

> By the way, I think we had a memory leak in the error handling of
> ofp_print_switch_features() that should be fixed in this patch. I'll
> send a separate patch for 1.6 and earlier.

Great.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

Reply via email to