[pve-devel] [PATCH v2 container 2/4] lxc: Avoid open-coding normal vs SDN-specific tap_plug()

[Christoph Heiss]

Thanks for the review!

On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 03:34:24PM +0100, Wolfgang Bumiller wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 03:02:43PM +0100, Christoph Heiss wrote:
> > This pattern is used in multiple places, thus extract it into a
> > subroutine on its own.
> >
> > No functional changes.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Christoph Heiss <c.heiss at proxmox.com>
> > ---
> > Might not be the best place for net_tap_plug(), putting this logic
> > inside PVE::Network would probably make more sense. But that would
> > entail a (bigger) refactoring, since it then also must be done for all
> > other tap_*() and veth_*() subroutines (and maybe some other things?)
> > for consistency..
> > In any case, that definitely would be too much for this series. I can do
> > that, but I'd do it as a follow-up series.
> >
> > Changes v1 -> v2:
> >  * New patch
> >
> >  src/PVE/LXC.pm  | 28 ++++++++++++++++------------
> >  src/lxcnetaddbr | 15 ++-------------
> >  2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/src/PVE/LXC.pm b/src/PVE/LXC.pm
> > index 345e343..0de5ba3 100644
> > --- a/src/PVE/LXC.pm
> > +++ b/src/PVE/LXC.pm
> > @@ -917,6 +917,18 @@ sub vm_stop_cleanup {
> >      warn $@ if $@; # avoid errors - just warn
> >  }
> >
> > +sub net_tap_plug {
> > +    if ($have_sdn) {
> > +	my ($iface, $bridge, $tag, $firewall, $trunks, $rate, $opts) = @_;
>
> ^ please don't do this conditional on `$have_sdn`. This just makes it
> harder to figure out how to use the function later (ie. quicker to write
> this one time now at the cost of reduced maintainability in the future).
>
> I'd much rather additionally have a prototype on the sub which may even
> declare the $opts parameter explicitly as being optional like so:
>
>     sub net_tap_plug : prototype($$$$$$;$) {
>         my ($iface, $bridge, $tag, $firewall, $trunks, $rate, $opts) = @_;
>         ...
Ack, will change that for v2. Wasn't sure about prototypes in Perl yet,
good time for me to read up on them a bit. Thanks again!

>
> Apart from that, the refactoring makes sense.