archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "VAUTRIN Emmanuel (Canal Plus Prestataire)" <>
To: Daniel Wagner <>
Cc: "" <>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] service: Fix default service update on ready state
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2021 15:43:58 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <MRZP264MB154494B92E616DB754E5F46A931F9@MRZP264MB1544.FRAP264.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210702074102.7rmohctvgqzzn6fb@beryllium.lan>

> By moving default_changed() after
>        def_service = connman_service_get_default();
>        service_update_preferred_order(def_service, service, new_state);
> the result is the code doesn't make sense anymore. Why calling
> service_update_preferred_order *before* we change the default?
> This is the very reason I am pushing back against these changes. They
> look innocent and might even work for some cases, but anyone later
> looking at this code will scratch his head and will say "this doesn't
> make sense". Also The commit message saying "the default shall be
> re-evaluated" doesn't help either. You need to explain why you need to
> change the order and why service_update_preferred_order() should operate
> on the 'outdated' default route.

I shall admit this part is really complex, with separated updates of the 
default service and the service list, so maybe it is not the best choice.
I propose to run my full test campaign again and check for a better solution
(or at least to describe the issues I am facing), after the completion of the topic
"service: Ignore state information in service reordering".

Best Regards,


  reply	other threads:[~2021-07-02 15:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-06-23 12:18 [PATCH] service: Fix default service update on ready state VAUTRIN Emmanuel (Canal Plus Prestataire)
2021-06-24  8:07 ` Daniel Wagner
2021-06-24  9:01   ` VAUTRIN Emmanuel (Canal Plus Prestataire)
2021-07-02  7:27     ` Daniel Wagner
2021-07-02  7:41       ` Daniel Wagner
2021-07-02 15:43         ` VAUTRIN Emmanuel (Canal Plus Prestataire) [this message]
2021-08-25 12:52           ` VAUTRIN Emmanuel (Canal Plus Prestataire)
2021-08-29 19:07             ` Daniel Wagner
2021-08-30  7:31               ` VAUTRIN Emmanuel (Canal Plus Prestataire)
2021-08-30  8:13                 ` Daniel Wagner
2021-08-30  8:28                   ` VAUTRIN Emmanuel (Canal Plus Prestataire)
2021-08-30  8:44                     ` Daniel Wagner

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=MRZP264MB154494B92E616DB754E5F46A931F9@MRZP264MB1544.FRAP264.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).