On 04/17/2015 04:51 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
On 16.04.2015 19:25, Laine Stump wrote:
> On 04/14/2015 12:59 PM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
>> Not only this simplifies the code a bit, it prepares the
>> environment for upcoming patches. The new
>> virNetDevBandwidthManipulateFilter() function is capable of both
>> removing a filter and adding a new one. At the same time! Yeah,
>> this is not currently used anywhere but look at the next commit
>> + *
>> + * Returns: 0 on success,
>> + * -1 otherwise (with error reported).
>> + */
>> +static int ATTRIBUTE_NONNULL(1)
>> +virNetDevBandwidthManipulateFilter(const char *ifname,
>> + const virMacAddr *ifmac_ptr,
>> + unsigned int id,
>> + const char *class_id,
>> + bool remove_old,
>> + bool create_new)
> How about making these two flags so that it will be easier to tell
> what's intended when looking at a call to the function?
I was thinking about this too, but then I went with booleans. My idea
was that it's shorter this way than inventing new enum items like
VIR_NET_DEV_BANDWIDTH_FILTER_CREATE or
VIR_NET_DEV_BANDWIDTH_FILTER_REMOVE. But if somebody prefers the other
way, I can switch to that.
I'm fine if you want to keep it as booleans, too.