hrs added inline comments.

INLINE COMMENTS
  sys/net/if_lagg.c:753 Please separate a llq loop from a handler for per-port 
configuration. A llq traversal should be required only once in lagg_port_ops() 
if the handlers process a single lagg_llq entry.
  sys/net/if_lagg.c:837 Is this (llq == NULL), not (llq != NULL)?
  sys/net/if_lagg.c:840 Why is cleanup required here?  This removes all of 
tasks not limited to MTU change.
  sys/net/if_lagg.c:861 free(NULL) does nothing.  Checking if NULL or not is 
useless.
  sys/net/if_lagg.c:872 This traversal and freeing an entry after processing it 
should be done in lagg_port_ops().
  sys/net/if_lagg.h:220 Please add "llq_" prefix to the members.
  sys/net/if_lagg.h:221 Is there any reason to have ifr as a pointer?  malloc 
is generally expensive in kernel, and overhead of struct ifreq is acceptable 
for me even if every llq has one.  I feel this complicates the error handling 
at least.

REPOSITORY
  rS FreeBSD src repository

REVISION DETAIL
  https://reviews.freebsd.org/D1986

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  https://reviews.freebsd.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/

To: rpokala, rstone, rpokala-panasas.com
Cc: smh, imp, melifaro, hrs, sbruno, lakshmi.n_msystechnologies.com, emaste, 
ae, freebsd-net-list
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Reply via email to