Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 1 Aug 2014 11:18:26 -0700
From:      Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>
To:        Tom Jones <jones@sdf.org>
Cc:        FreeBSD Net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: [PATCH] Implementation of draft-ietf-tcpm-newcwv-06
Message-ID:  <CAJ-Vmo=QowhZmVva7XV1WrEQAirX=5Y9TGk_5L7C6KjW1BAeDg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20140801153744.GA76021@gmail.com>
References:  <20140630170453.GA21404@gmail.com> <CAJ-VmonjB5C%2BDfJkDUeyJrqzHa1ptaQPZYtcyqN1PpKeii51Fg@mail.gmail.com> <20140630205359.GA2221@gmail.com> <20140801141920.GC75551@gmail.com> <20140801153744.GA76021@gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi!

This is looking better!

Structurally though, I'd look at all those places where you only
update tp->newcv and instead of passing in the tp, pass in a pointer
to tp->newcv. That way you're keeping a lid on the scope of the helper
functions - they only get access to as much data as they need so you
later won't be tempted to do things like go "oh, I just need to get
access to this one tcpcb field!" and suddenly it's not so well
contained.

As for behavioural - I think you'll have to poke Robert or Lawrence a
little more just to get some feedback from them.

It's good that it's disabled-by-default for now - that lets it get
into -HEAD with a lack of surprise.

Thanks for doing this!



-a



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-Vmo=QowhZmVva7XV1WrEQAirX=5Y9TGk_5L7C6KjW1BAeDg>