[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1481488076.6603.3.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2016 12:27:56 -0800
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Jan Wang <bbw725@....com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Signed-off-by: Jan Wang <bbw725@....com>
On Sun, 2016-12-11 at 23:31 +0800, Jan Wang wrote:
> [net]: Missing init queue tail
>
> Accept queue tail doesn't initialize NULL.
> Though looks like no harm, unify it with reqsk_queue_remove(
> it will initialize tail to NULL when empty).
Well, if having a NULL or not causes no harm, what about removing
code, instead of adding some defensive one ?
Also your patch submission is wrong :
Title should not include 'Signed-off-by...'
Anyway, net-next is closed, you'll have to wait before submitting such a
change.
diff --git a/include/net/request_sock.h b/include/net/request_sock.h
index 6ebe13eb1c4cbcd84c4b3345b051b3320d7591e6..a655c6aea7c0c8c429d5629c7fb639d6de832438 100644
--- a/include/net/request_sock.h
+++ b/include/net/request_sock.h
@@ -195,8 +195,6 @@ static inline struct request_sock *reqsk_queue_remove(struct request_sock_queue
if (req) {
sk_acceptq_removed(parent);
queue->rskq_accept_head = req->dl_next;
- if (queue->rskq_accept_head == NULL)
- queue->rskq_accept_tail = NULL;
}
spin_unlock_bh(&queue->rskq_lock);
return req;
Powered by blists - more mailing lists