[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <66faf2363787a_18c93d294fe@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2024 14:47:18 -0400
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To: Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@...ux.dev>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] selftests: net: csum: Clean up
recv_verify_packet_ipv6
Sean Anderson wrote:
> On 9/30/24 13:16, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > Sean Anderson wrote:
> >> Rename ip_len to payload_len since the length in this case refers only
> >> to the payload, and not the entire IP packet like for IPv4. While we're
> >> at it, just use the variable directly when calling
> >> recv_verify_packet_udp/tcp.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@...ux.dev>
> >
> > Not sure such refactoring patches are worth the effort.
>
> Well, FWIW you commented on this in your review, so I figured I'd send it.
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/66dbb4fcbf560_2af86229423@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch/
True. I meant if respun.
Whether such changes are worth it as standalone patch is subjective.
And I get where you're coming from, given that thread.
Reviewed-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists