[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y8VIk3SKwTC3rqfJ@DEN-LT-70577>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2023 12:52:36 +0000
From: <Daniel.Machon@...rochip.com>
To: <error27@...il.com>
CC: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <davem@...emloft.net>,
<edumazet@...gle.com>, <kuba@...nel.org>, <pabeni@...hat.com>,
<Lars.Povlsen@...rochip.com>, <Steen.Hegelund@...rochip.com>,
<UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>, <joe@...ches.com>,
<Horatiu.Vultur@...rochip.com>, <Julia.Lawall@...ia.fr>,
<petrm@...dia.com>, <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
<maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/6] net: dcb: add new rewrite table
Hi Dan,
Thank you for your feedback.
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 09:15:51PM +0100, Daniel Machon wrote:
> > +/* Get protocol value from rewrite entry. */
> > +u16 dcb_getrewr(struct net_device *dev, struct dcb_app *app)
> ^^^
>
> > +{
> > + struct dcb_app_type *itr;
> > + u8 proto = 0;
>
> Should "proto" be a u16 to match itr->app.protocol and the return type?
It should.
>
> > +
> > + spin_lock_bh(&dcb_lock);
> > + itr = dcb_rewr_lookup(app, dev->ifindex, -1);
> > + if (itr)
> > + proto = itr->app.protocol;
> > + spin_unlock_bh(&dcb_lock);
> > +
> > + return proto;
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(dcb_getrewr);
> > +
> > + /* Add rewrite entry to the rewrite list. */
> > +int dcb_setrewr(struct net_device *dev, struct dcb_app *new)
> > +{
> > + int err = 0;
>
> No need to initialize this. It only disables static checkers and
> triggers a false positive about dead stores.
Yes, you are right :)
Will be fixed in next version.
/Daniel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists