On Thu, 13 Oct 2016 17:57:42 -0700, Tom Herbert wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -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