[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b152a438cb03908f390c27e98c2c5ca0@linux.dev>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021 02:24:30 +0000
From: yajun.deng@...ux.dev
To: "Eric Dumazet" <eric.dumazet@...il.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
kuba@...nel.org
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] neigh: introduce __neigh_confirm() for
__ipv{4, 6}_confirm_neigh
November 18, 2021 1:36 AM, "Eric Dumazet" <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> On 11/17/21 4:02 AM, Yajun Deng wrote:
>
>> Those __ipv4_confirm_neigh(), __ipv6_confirm_neigh() and __ipv6_confirm_neigh_stub()
>> functions have similar code. introduce __neigh_confirm() for it.
>
> At first glance, this might add an indirect call ?
Yes, But this need keep __ipv4_confirm_neigh() the same parameters as __ipv6_confirm_neigh().
Powered by blists - more mailing lists