[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YgdsqzOPZJLLkhAk@nataraja>
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:15:39 +0100
From: Harald Welte <laforge@...monks.org>
To: Marcin Szycik <marcin.szycik@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, michal.swiatkowski@...ux.intel.com,
wojciech.drewek@...el.com, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org,
pablo@...filter.org, osmocom-net-gprs@...ts.osmocom.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v5 1/6] gtp: Allow to create GTP device
without FDs
Hi Marcin,
I'm sorry if you think this is too much nit-picking, but moving
around functions and removing forward declarations is making it
unneccessarily hard to read the generated diff:
Now it's not possible to see which bits of the code you really changed,
as entire functions have moved position within the file.
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 06:55:00PM +0100, Marcin Szycik wrote:
> -static int gtp_hashtable_new(struct gtp_dev *gtp, int hsize);
> -static int gtp_encap_enable(struct gtp_dev *gtp, struct nlattr *data[]);
> +static int gtp_hashtable_new(struct gtp_dev *gtp, int hsize)
> +{
> + int i;
> +
> + gtp->addr_hash = kmalloc_array(hsize, sizeof(struct hlist_head),
> + GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOWARN);
> + if (gtp->addr_hash == NULL)
...
I would appreciate if you could do any re-ordering of functions in a
separate, marked "cosmetic" commit, so we can see the actual changes you
make to the code in one patch, and the re-arranging in another.
Thanks!
--
- Harald Welte <laforge@...monks.org> http://laforge.gnumonks.org/
============================================================================
"Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option."
(ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists