No problem =).
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> wrote: > Well it's been very helpful to look at it so thanks for humoring me. > > On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 04:47:45PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote: >> Haha this is why I didn't want to send the series out yet =). >> >> Ethan >> >> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> wrote: >> > I noticed one more thing. ?After this patch, lacp_slave_enable() is >> > reduced to just: >> > >> > void >> > lacp_slave_enable(struct lacp *lacp, void *slave_, bool enabled) >> > { >> > ? ?struct slave *slave = slave_lookup(lacp, slave_); >> > >> > ? ?if (slave->enabled != enabled) { >> > ? ? ? ?slave->enabled = enabled; >> > ? ?} >> > } >> > >> > which in turn can be simplified to: >> > >> > void >> > lacp_slave_enable(struct lacp *lacp, void *slave_, bool enabled) >> > { >> > ? ?struct slave *slave = slave_lookup(lacp, slave_); >> > ? ?slave->enabled = enabled; >> > } >> > >> > or even to: >> > >> > void >> > lacp_slave_enable(struct lacp *lacp, void *slave_, bool enabled) >> > { >> > ? ?slave_lookup(lacp, slave_)->enabled = enabled; >> > } >> > > _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
