I'll trust your judgment.
On Tue, Aug 05, 2014 at 02:10:27PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote: > Actually, the more I think about it. I think I made the right case. > The only caller that wants to supply it's own odp_actions buffer is > dpif-netdev. For everyone else, requiring a user supplied buffer > would require some rather complicated memory management. I'd rather > hide that complexity within the xlate module. > > Thoughts? > Ethan > > On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Ethan Jackson <et...@nicira.com> wrote: > > I did but I was lazy. I'll change it. > > > > Ethan > > > > On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 06:39:17PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote: > >>> In future patches, this will allow dpif-netdev to avoid a copy. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Ethan Jackson <et...@nicira.com> > >> > >> It might be better to require callers to supply a buffer, because it > >> reduces special cases. Did you consider that approach? _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
