On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 10:23 PM, Justin Pettit <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Apr 8, 2018, at 7:54 PM, Darrell Ball <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > diff --git a/lib/ct-dpif.c b/lib/ct-dpif.c > > index 81f9d92..60c8986 100644 > > --- a/lib/ct-dpif.c > > +++ b/lib/ct-dpif.c > > @@ -188,6 +188,27 @@ ct_dpif_ipf_set_nfrag_max(struct dpif *dpif, > uint32_t max_frags) > > : EOPNOTSUPP); > > } > > > > +int ct_dpif_ipf_get_status(struct dpif *dpif, bool *ipf_v4_enabled, > > + unsigned int *min_v4_frag_size, unsigned int *nfrag_max, > > + unsigned int *nfrag, unsigned int *n4frag_accepted, > > + unsigned int *n4frag_completed_sent, > > + unsigned int *n4frag_expired_sent, unsigned int *n4frag_too_small, > > + unsigned int *n4frag_overlap, bool *ipf_v6_enabled, > > + unsigned int *min_v6_frag_size, unsigned int *n6frag_accepted, > > + unsigned int *n6frag_completed_sent, > > + unsigned int *n6frag_expired_sent, unsigned int *n6frag_too_small, > > + unsigned int *n6frag_overlap) > > +{ > > ... > > diff --git a/lib/dpif-netdev.c b/lib/dpif-netdev.c > > index 542478d..35094f0 100644 > > --- a/lib/dpif-netdev.c > > +++ b/lib/dpif-netdev.c > > @@ -5892,6 +5892,38 @@ dpif_netdev_ipf_set_nfrag_max(struct dpif *dpif > OVS_UNUSED, > > return ipf_set_nfrag_max(max_frags); > > } > > > > +static int > > +dpif_netdev_ipf_get_status(struct dpif *dpif OVS_UNUSED, > > + bool *ipf_v4_enabled, unsigned int *min_v4_frag_size, > > + unsigned int *nfrag_max, unsigned int *nfrag, > > + unsigned int *n4frag_accepted, unsigned int *n4frag_completed_sent, > > + unsigned int *n4frag_expired_sent, unsigned int *n4frag_too_small, > > + unsigned int *n4frag_overlap, bool *ipf_v6_enabled, > > + unsigned int *min_v6_frag_size, unsigned int *n6frag_accepted, > > + unsigned int *n6frag_completed_sent, unsigned int > *n6frag_expired_sent, > > + unsigned int *n6frag_too_small, unsigned int *n6frag_overlap) > > +{ > > The arguments to these functions are pretty long. How about using > 'ipf_status' instead? Most of the callers are in files that already > including "ipf.h". > It is intentional information hiding from the higher layers. Also, the API is common across dpif providers. > > As before, some of my previous comments will apply to this patch, too. > got it; thanks > > Thanks, > > --Justin > > > _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
