On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 04:58:08PM -0800, Ethan Jackson wrote: > In future patches, a netdev's datapath port name may not > necessarily be the same as its device name. This patch prepares for > this by making the distinction in the netdev and dpif layers. > > Signed-off-by: Ethan Jackson <et...@nicira.com>
I don't see a problem with this except for a layering violation: the generic "netdev" layer now has a function and a function pointer in it that is specific to the dpif code. I can see two ways to deal with this: either move it out of the generic "netdev" layer into some other place, or to add conspicuous comments on ->get_dpif_port() and netdev_get_dpif_port() that explain the context and why this particular function might not make any sense (and you should just leave it NULL) if you're implementing something that isn't a dpif-based switch. Thanks, Ben. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
