From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <hideaki.yoshif...@miraclelinux.com> Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 11:29:06 +0900
> Jiri Benc wrote: >> On Wed, 19 Aug 2015 19:27:22 +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki wrote: >>>> You're right generally. But this one should be okay and I did this >>>> deliberately: the patch adding LWTUNNEL_ENCAP_ILA was merged two days >>>> ago, is in net-next only, is not used by anything in user space yet. >>>> And I think it's better to have LWTUNNEL_ENCAP_IP and >>>> LWTUNNEL_ENCAP_IP6 without anything in between. >>> >>> I do think you should have some descriptions. >> >> Sorry, I meant to put this into the description but forget to add it >> after the rebase on top of ILA (as the patchset conflicted with the ILA >> work and was developed in parallel). >> >> Are you okay with inserting LWTUNNEL_ENCAP_IP6 before >> LWTUNNEL_ENCAP_ILA? If so, I'll resend with the explanation added. > > Well, I think we should always avoid adding new entries into the > middle of enums because it will make bisecting more complex or more > difficult for example even if it *seems* that we have no users yet and > the risk is not so high. > > Dave? Agreed. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
