Hi, Marcel Holtmann wrote: > Hi Dave, : >> include/linux/netdevice.h | 6 +- >> include/net/6lowpan.h | 24 ++ >> include/net/addrconf.h | 3 + >> include/net/ndisc.h | 124 ++++++++- >> net/6lowpan/6lowpan_i.h | 2 + >> net/6lowpan/Makefile | 2 +- >> net/6lowpan/core.c | 50 +++- >> net/6lowpan/iphc.c | 167 +++++++++-- >> net/6lowpan/ndisc.c | 633 >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> net/bluetooth/6lowpan.c | 2 + >> net/ieee802154/6lowpan/core.c | 12 + >> net/ieee802154/6lowpan/tx.c | 107 ++++--- >> net/ipv6/addrconf.c | 7 +- >> net/ipv6/ndisc.c | 132 +++++---- >> net/ipv6/route.c | 4 +- >> 15 files changed, 1117 insertions(+), 158 deletions(-) >> create mode 100644 net/6lowpan/ndisc.c > > is there a chance that we get input into this patch set? I wonder also if it > would be acceptable to take this through bluetooth-next or should it better > go straight into net-next?
The core idea of introducing ndisc_ops is okay, but I do think this series of patches should be refactored; we should not make another "copy" of core of ndisc logic. We can introduce "ops" for each option, for example. Thank you. -- Hideaki Yoshifuji <hideaki.yoshif...@miraclelinux.com> Technical Division, MIRACLE LINUX CORPORATION
