diff mbox series

[1/2] xfrm: delete duplicated functions that calls same xfrm_api_check()

Message ID 20220319074240.554227-2-steffen.klassert@secunet.com (mailing list archive)
State Accepted
Commit 2ecda181682e9ed66dfbd5f8445c5d5a35b984d3
Delegated to: Netdev Maintainers
Headers show
Series [1/2] xfrm: delete duplicated functions that calls same xfrm_api_check() | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
netdev/fixes_present success Fixes tag not required for -next series
netdev/subject_prefix warning Target tree name not specified in the subject
netdev/cover_letter success Pull request is its own cover letter
netdev/patch_count success Link
netdev/header_inline success No static functions without inline keyword in header files
netdev/build_32bit success Errors and warnings before: 2 this patch: 2
netdev/cc_maintainers warning 1 maintainers not CCed: pabeni@redhat.com
netdev/build_clang success Errors and warnings before: 18 this patch: 18
netdev/module_param success Was 0 now: 0
netdev/verify_signedoff success Signed-off-by tag matches author and committer
netdev/verify_fixes success No Fixes tag
netdev/build_allmodconfig_warn success Errors and warnings before: 7 this patch: 7
netdev/checkpatch success total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 checks, 28 lines checked
netdev/kdoc success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/source_inline success Was 0 now: 0
netdev/tree_selection success Guessing tree name failed - patch did not apply

Commit Message

Steffen Klassert March 19, 2022, 7:42 a.m. UTC 
From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia.com>

The xfrm_dev_register() and xfrm_dev_feat_change() have same
implementation of one call to xfrm_api_check(). Instead of doing such
indirection, call to xfrm_api_check() directly and delete duplicated
functions.

Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
---
 net/xfrm/xfrm_device.c | 14 ++------------
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

Comments

patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@kernel.org March 19, 2022, 3:10 p.m. UTC | #1 
Hello:

This series was applied to netdev/net-next.git (master)
by Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>:

On Sat, 19 Mar 2022 08:42:39 +0100 you wrote:
> From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia.com>
> 
> The xfrm_dev_register() and xfrm_dev_feat_change() have same
> implementation of one call to xfrm_api_check(). Instead of doing such
> indirection, call to xfrm_api_check() directly and delete duplicated
> functions.
> 
> [...]

Here is the summary with links:
  - [1/2] xfrm: delete duplicated functions that calls same xfrm_api_check()
    https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/2ecda181682e
  - [2/2] xfrm: rework default policy structure
    https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/b58b1f563ab7

You are awesome, thank you!
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_device.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_device.c
index 3fa066419d37..36d6c1835844 100644
--- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_device.c
+++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_device.c
@@ -380,16 +380,6 @@  static int xfrm_api_check(struct net_device *dev)
 	return NOTIFY_DONE;
 }
 
-static int xfrm_dev_register(struct net_device *dev)
-{
-	return xfrm_api_check(dev);
-}
-
-static int xfrm_dev_feat_change(struct net_device *dev)
-{
-	return xfrm_api_check(dev);
-}
-
 static int xfrm_dev_down(struct net_device *dev)
 {
 	if (dev->features & NETIF_F_HW_ESP)
@@ -404,10 +394,10 @@  static int xfrm_dev_event(struct notifier_block *this, unsigned long event, void
 
 	switch (event) {
 	case NETDEV_REGISTER:
-		return xfrm_dev_register(dev);
+		return xfrm_api_check(dev);
 
 	case NETDEV_FEAT_CHANGE:
-		return xfrm_dev_feat_change(dev);
+		return xfrm_api_check(dev);
 
 	case NETDEV_DOWN:
 	case NETDEV_UNREGISTER: