On Thu, 13 Oct 2016 17:57:42 -0700, Tom Herbert wrote: > @@ -43,13 +44,11 @@ struct lwtunnel_encap_ops { > int (*get_encap_size)(struct lwtunnel_state *lwtstate); > int (*cmp_encap)(struct lwtunnel_state *a, struct lwtunnel_state *b); > int (*xmit)(struct sk_buff *skb); > + void (*destroy_state)(struct lwtunnel_state *lws); > };
Could you add destroy_state next to build_state? Seems weird to have those two scattered at the opposite ends of the structure. Looks good otherwise. Thanks, Jiri