On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 03:52:17PM +0300, Timo Teras wrote:
quoted text
>
> -extern void *flow_cache_lookup(struct net *net, struct flowi *key, u16 family,
> -			       u8 dir, flow_resolve_t resolver);
> +struct flow_cache_entry_ops {
> +	struct flow_cache_entry_ops ** (*get)(struct flow_cache_entry_ops **);
> +	int (*check)(struct flow_cache_entry_ops **);
> +	void (*delete)(struct flow_cache_entry_ops **);
> +};
> +
> +typedef struct flow_cache_entry_ops **(*flow_resolve_t)(
> +		struct net *net, struct flowi *key, u16 family,
> +		u8 dir, struct flow_cache_entry_ops **old_ops, void *ctx);

OK this bit really bugs me.

When I first looked at it, my reaction was why on earth are we
returning an ops pointer? Only after some digging around do I see
the fact that this ops pointer is in fact embedded in xfrm_policy.

How about embedding flow_cache_entry in xfrm_policy instead? Returning
flow_cache_entry * would make a lot more sense than a nested pointer
to flow_cache_entry_ops.

Cheers,
-- 
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html