| Message ID | 1551136130-121914-1-git-send-email-dlu998@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | 6f2e4f09fb18fb6f41dd3243b4e157ca2d2c6db2 |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [ovs-dev,branch-2.8,1/2] packets: Change return type of 'packet_csum_upperlayer6'. | expand |
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 03:08:49PM -0800, Darrell Ball wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Darrell Ball <dlu998@gmail.com>
I applied this series, thanks for the backport!
Bleep bloop. Greetings Darrell Ball, I am a robot and I have tried out your patch. Thanks for your contribution. I encountered some error that I wasn't expecting. See the details below. checkpatch: WARNING: Empty return followed by brace, consider omitting #78 FILE: lib/conntrack.c:3101: } Lines checked: 83, Warnings: 1, Errors: 0 Please check this out. If you feel there has been an error, please email aconole@bytheb.org Thanks, 0-day Robot
This warning could be considered a bit confusing bcoz this patch does not modify the file being reported. On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 4:48 PM 0-day Robot <robot@bytheb.org> wrote: > Bleep bloop. Greetings Darrell Ball, I am a robot and I have tried out > your patch. > Thanks for your contribution. > > I encountered some error that I wasn't expecting. See the details below. > > > checkpatch: > WARNING: Empty return followed by brace, consider omitting > #78 FILE: lib/conntrack.c:3101: > } > > Lines checked: 83, Warnings: 1, Errors: 0 > > > Please check this out. If you feel there has been an error, please email > aconole@bytheb.org > > Thanks, > 0-day Robot >
Darrell Ball <dlu998@gmail.com> writes: > This warning could be considered a bit confusing bcoz this patch does not modify the file being reported. Agreed. I need to fix up the auto-detection. It looks like the series had already been applied. The robot no longer warns when the patch has already been applied but it looks like it won't stop processing. The mechanism is to `git am` and then `checkpatch -q -1` Since these patches were already applied, the checkpatch -q -1 was picking up the last patch in the series twice. I'll see what I can do about getting it fixed :) Thanks, Darrell! > On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 4:48 PM 0-day Robot <robot@bytheb.org> wrote: > > Bleep bloop. Greetings Darrell Ball, I am a robot and I have tried out your patch. > Thanks for your contribution. > > I encountered some error that I wasn't expecting. See the details below. > > checkpatch: > WARNING: Empty return followed by brace, consider omitting > #78 FILE: lib/conntrack.c:3101: > } > > Lines checked: 83, Warnings: 1, Errors: 0 > > Please check this out. If you feel there has been an error, please email aconole@bytheb.org > > Thanks, > 0-day Robot
diff --git a/lib/packets.c b/lib/packets.c index 5f57030..a9893ea 100644 --- a/lib/packets.c +++ b/lib/packets.c @@ -1668,7 +1668,7 @@ packet_csum_pseudoheader6(const struct ovs_16aligned_ip6_hdr *ip6) /* Calculate the IPv6 upper layer checksum according to RFC2460. We pass the ip6_nxt and ip6_plen values, so it will also work if extension headers are present. */ -uint16_t +ovs_be16 packet_csum_upperlayer6(const struct ovs_16aligned_ip6_hdr *ip6, const void *data, uint8_t l4_protocol, uint16_t l4_size) diff --git a/lib/packets.h b/lib/packets.h index 705d0b2..e4e0dca 100644 --- a/lib/packets.h +++ b/lib/packets.h @@ -930,7 +930,7 @@ struct icmp6_error_header { BUILD_ASSERT_DECL(ICMP6_ERROR_HEADER_LEN == sizeof(struct icmp6_error_header)); uint32_t packet_csum_pseudoheader6(const struct ovs_16aligned_ip6_hdr *); -uint16_t packet_csum_upperlayer6(const struct ovs_16aligned_ip6_hdr *, +ovs_be16 packet_csum_upperlayer6(const struct ovs_16aligned_ip6_hdr *, const void *, uint8_t, uint16_t); /* Neighbor Discovery option field.
Signed-off-by: Darrell Ball <dlu998@gmail.com> --- lib/packets.c | 2 +- lib/packets.h | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)