Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752910AbdG1V0F (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Jul 2017 17:26:05 -0400 Received: from vps0.lunn.ch ([178.209.37.122]:44348 "EHLO vps0.lunn.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752569AbdG1V0E (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Jul 2017 17:26:04 -0400 Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 23:25:55 +0200 From: Andrew Lunn To: John Crispin Cc: Vivien Didelot , Florian Fainelli , "David S . Miller" , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 3/4] net-next: dsa: fix flow dissection Message-ID: <20170728212555.GB11564@lunn.ch> References: <20170721085813.30789-1-john@phrozen.org> <20170721085813.30789-3-john@phrozen.org> <20170726151013.GD12049@lunn.ch> <82b46393-6c63-eedf-25e4-2bd2278c0d16@phrozen.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <82b46393-6c63-eedf-25e4-2bd2278c0d16@phrozen.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 216 Lines: 9 > thanks for the feedback. should I add 2 callbacks for each of the 2 > parameters ? Hi John A single callback is better. We don't want to have to peek into the packet twice to determine two values. Andrew