On 11/23/2015 06:23 AM, Cong Wang wrote: > On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 6:57 AM, Nikolay Aleksandrov > <ra...@blackwall.org> wrote: >> From: Nikolay Aleksandrov <niko...@cumulusnetworks.com> >> >> Before mroute_reg_vif_num was defined only if any of the CONFIG_PIMSM_ >> options were set, but that's not really necessary as the size of the >> struct is the same in both cases (checked with pahole, both cases size >> is 3256 bytes) and we can remove some unnecessary ifdefs to simplify the >> code. >> > > Not sure if this really simplifies the code, since now > mroute_reg_vif_num is hidden > deeper after your patch and there are still some code under CONFIG_IP_PIMSM. > CONFIG_IP_PIMSM is removed in the next patch, and it's not "hidden" anymore than it was before.
> If you really care about it, how about introducing a helper function > to set and get > mrt->mroute_reg_vif_num? > Patches are welcome, if you don't get to it then I will with the next set. -- 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
