On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 12:25:14PM -0700, Ansis Atteka wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > This will make it possible, in later commits, to make ovsdb-server > connect > > > to OVS managers only after ovs-vswitchd has completed its initial > > > configuration. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> > > [...] > > > > +static void > > > +ovsdb_server_add_remote(struct unixctl_conn *conn, int argc > OVS_UNUSED, > > > + const char *argv[], void *remotes_) > > > +{ > > > + struct sset *remotes = remotes_; > > > + > > > + sset_add(remotes, argv[1]); > > > > > + unixctl_command_reply(conn, NULL); > > > > > sset_add() would return NULL, if item was already present in sset. > Perhaps > > unixctl_command_reply() should pass a warning to caller in this case > (e.g. > > "remote already present")? > > I don't think it's really a problem if the remote's already there. In > particular, it's slightly better in the use case in this series if > adding a remote is idempotent. > > Unless you feel strongly, I'm going to leave this as-is. > > I don't have strong preference. Either way is fine.
_______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
