[PATCH 0/1][RFC]: field name identifier conventions

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Following the earlier discussion I have created two patches which shorten
the identifiers in some of the structs:
 
  1) A patch for the CCIDs, where I used the scheme suggested by Arnaldo
     (i.e. "c<N>{tx,rx}", e.g. hcrx->c2tx_ssthresh). This resulted in a 
     rather large patch (66k) and was rather disappointing - there was not
     much of the expected reduction in multiline expressions. For these
     reasons I think it is better to stick with the old scheme.
     But if people are still interested in this and may have different opinion,
     have a look at how the conversion looks at:

     http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/users/gerrit/dccp/rfc_patch_new_ccid_field_ids.diff


  2) A patch for ackvec.{c,h}. This follows next and simply replaces the `dccp' in
     the struct dccp_ackvec{,_record} fields. I like this patch because it makes
     the code easier to read.

     Arnaldo can you please indicate whether you find this patch acceptable - I am
     working on Ack Vectors (adding a tail pointer and fixing acknowledging old 
     Ack Vectors): if you are not ok with the patch, then I use the old scheme.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dccp" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [IETF DCCP]     [Linux Networking]     [Git]     [Security]     [Linux Assembly]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux