On 3/19/24 13:21, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> On 3/19/24 13:17, Eelco Chaudron wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 19 Mar 2024, at 13:11, Jakob Meng wrote:
>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> On 15.03.24 11:19, Eelco Chaudron wrote:
>>>> On 18 Jan 2024, at 16:26, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> ...
>>>> Thank for the patch! What a beast to go trough ;)
>>>
>>> Thank you for doing it anyway ☺️
>>>
>>>> I believe the current approach is acceptable. However, we could also
>>>> incorporate union callbacks: if registration only supports text, we would
>>>> use callback A, and if multiple formats exist, we could employ the new 
>>>> style
>>>> callback. This would mitigate the need for a significant overhaul. Just a
>>>> suggestion, as I'm ok with the current approach. :)
>>>
>>> This trades many-initial-changes-across-a-lot-of-files for a 
>>> more-complex-registration-and-callback-logic.
>>>
>>> We could also make struct unixctl_conn visible (move it from lib/unixctl.c 
>>> to lib/unixctl.h) and let callees read the output format from its 'fmt' 
>>> member. Then we would not have to change the callback signature at all.
>>
>> Or have a utility function to return the format, which keeps the structure 
>> invisible.
> 
> +1, just add some access methods.
> 
>>
>>> I do not have a strong opinion here. What do you, Ilya and the others think?
>>
>> I’ll wait for others to chime in...
> 
> I don't think changing all the callbacks is a good thing to do.
> i.e. this patch should not exist or be very small.

* or it should be very small.

> 
>>
>>>> Some small style comments highlighted below.
>>>
>>> I would like to have your eagle eyes...👀 Fixed them!
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jakob
>>
> 

_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev

Reply via email to