netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: xfrm: xfrm_policy: fix inline not at beginning of declaration

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20140108055536.GX31491@secunet.com>
Date:	Wed, 8 Jan 2014 06:55:36 +0100
From:	Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	dborkman@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: xfrm: xfrm_policy: fix inline not at
 beginning of declaration

On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 06:34:12PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> From: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>
> Date: Tue,  7 Jan 2014 23:20:27 +0100
> 
> > Fix three warnings related to:
> > 
> >   net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c:1644:1: warning: 'inline' is not at beginning of declaration [-Wold-style-declaration]
> >   net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c:1656:1: warning: 'inline' is not at beginning of declaration [-Wold-style-declaration]
> >   net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c:1668:1: warning: 'inline' is not at beginning of declaration [-Wold-style-declaration]
> > 
> > Just removing the inline keyword is sufficient as the compiler will
> > decide on its own about inlining or not.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>
> 
> Applied.

I have a fix for this warnings in the ipsec-next tree too:

commit 2f3ea9a95c58fd0e4bed18a9c9dfe53739fee3b2
Author: Weilong Chen <chenweilong@...wei.com>
Date:   Tue Dec 24 09:43:50 2013 +0800

    xfrm: checkpatch erros with inline keyword position
    
    Signed-off-by: Weilong Chen <chenweilong@...wei.com>
    Signed-off-by: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>


Should I revert it, or do you want to solve the conflict when
I send the ipsec-next pull request?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html