Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
udp_listener: refactor ActiveUdpListener creation #7884
udp_listener: refactor ActiveUdpListener creation #7884
Changes from all commits
6afe56a
2239c8c
fae6dfd
750b66a
00bcedd
0135b13
c1acee6
38d134f
4073c3d
fe4d6ed
0b8e3be
d7ecaa1
a671885
bd92a03
2e98344
1b106de
80b0cbb
68e52e1
e9e0141
7589802
1bacc51
c799d70
699583d
02c116c
2e10b24
c882315
ebf5b51
070da9c
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry to keep asking for changes here, but why do we need this accessor if we have enable/disable below? Can we have one or the other? Can't we just enable/disable through this?
/wait-any
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ConnectionHandlerImpl::findListenerByAddress() returns a reference to it. We discussed this before and agree'ed to have both interfaces: https://github.com/envoyproxy/envoy/pull/7884/files/75898021f385722f5f465adf7b1f403a20819ea1#r317200472
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Right that's fine. What I'm saying is there is no reason to expose the full listener as well as disable/enable, etc. I would remove disable and enable. The reason to have an explicit destroy method is to avoid exposing the unique_ptr by reference, which could be filled by the caller with a different listener. Does that make sense?
/wait
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I see. Removed.