Re: [PATCH RFC 08/24] IPVS: Make protocol handler functions support IPv6

To: Julius Volz <juliusv@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 08/24] IPVS: Make protocol handler functions support IPv6
Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, lvs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx, kaber@xxxxxxxxx, vbusam@xxxxxxxxxx
From: Brian Haley <brian.haley@xxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 10:08:30 -0400
Julius Volz wrote:
I guessed from the name and other uses that __constant_htons() is just
a version of htons() optimized for values that are constant at compile
time. Is this right? But htons() is fine too in any case.

I think the __constant one is for initializations. All I know is that someone (Stephen Hemminger?) always points this out in other patchsets, so I beat him to it.

So why can't you just create one ip_vs_debug_packet_v6() instead of these ah
and esp ones which are identical?

If you look at the original files, the whole ip_vs_proto_ah.c and
ip_vs_proto_esp.c are 100% identical except for the protocol names /
constants :-/ So I stuck with this pattern for now. Maybe it would
make sense to join those two files in a change separate from the v6
functionality? There's already a lot of duplication in the existing
IPVS that could be removed...

I didn't look too closely, there's a lot of patches! :) Doing it in a separate patch is probably a good idea though.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>