From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A877AC433DF for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2020 04:52:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F43E20823 for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2020 04:52:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726062AbgFEEwu (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Jun 2020 00:52:50 -0400 Received: from mail-wm1-f68.google.com ([209.85.128.68]:54032 "EHLO mail-wm1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725280AbgFEEwu (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Jun 2020 00:52:50 -0400 Received: by mail-wm1-f68.google.com with SMTP id l26so7159910wme.3 for ; Thu, 04 Jun 2020 21:52:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:reply-to:subject:to:cc:references:from :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=/a3q9oJ/+Q5ffliIOcEjfwRPLXfx4yLmntpdJIKRnC4=; b=DxkcHfSFJPtTIBddqFv1QTqU8vM7gD/grkSjI9HCrV2Em65aG4gqJCzVD41O5DFoKt 9aISTZNPtJScZLna5yFdiajuwnWaw/8d//HOFccKDVBxwuf5ELd9aJuaHbfCR8yi2r8X Hmttkos4kA0qhw0M2PmnZmiej2kJ5Jb5+AUNlqHWgOTaJBuRp4S/Gtaq/u40tsWXjQtF DKFCack5DTVdKRO4vZaeTbSVps93Mdgd3kRDkTfWiCxFhA/MzofZCvyQ/+O4RbEs/ul5 RH4SsmQu/pOtIUtvdhosdFYHvDAfb9MhXxCkY5vjDL/7SFryM8a20KLFTZSu7rs7A+uj QdbA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530anbHpMoQoQCkxFIAB2tdbDQFSHZ2CgQQo+7yu7L0cDXMXXjbC BbBgss6e3lAjsJ5Z9cmdbak= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxL2wzHvBMIKeVYvp/inGbD214wjZJ77k/7XpRXOkQtHc28x63owtZ3kXJ6ECGE3zOMfq7FqA== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:e914:: with SMTP id q20mr698002wmc.145.1591332768428; Thu, 04 Jun 2020 21:52:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2a02:21b0:9002:414a:d51e:6f07:7e6f:fcfa? ([2a02:21b0:9002:414a:d51e:6f07:7e6f:fcfa]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z12sm11454807wrg.9.2020.06.04.21.52.47 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 04 Jun 2020 21:52:47 -0700 (PDT) Reply-To: valentin@longchamp.me Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: sched: make the watchdog functions more coherent To: David Miller Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, jiri@resnulli.us, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com, jhs@mojatatu.com References: <20200603212113.11801-1-valentin@longchamp.me> <20200604.155512.1355727491425437227.davem@davemloft.net> From: Valentin Longchamp Message-ID: <24d3d43f-8b69-c4e1-9c42-89202705c542@longchamp.me> Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2020 06:52:47 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200604.155512.1355727491425437227.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org Le 05.06.2020 à 00:55, David Miller a écrit : > From: Valentin Longchamp > Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2020 23:21:13 +0200 > >> Remove dev_watchdog_up() that directly called __netdev_watchdog_up() and >> rename dev_watchdog_down() to __netdev_watchdog_down() for symmetry. >> >> Signed-off-by: Valentin Longchamp >> --- >> net/sched/sch_generic.c | 11 +++-------- >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/net/sched/sch_generic.c b/net/sched/sch_generic.c >> index 2efd5b61acef..f3cb740a2941 100644 >> --- a/net/sched/sch_generic.c >> +++ b/net/sched/sch_generic.c >> @@ -465,12 +465,7 @@ void __netdev_watchdog_up(struct net_device *dev) >> } >> } >> >> -static void dev_watchdog_up(struct net_device *dev) >> -{ >> - __netdev_watchdog_up(dev); >> -} >> - >> -static void dev_watchdog_down(struct net_device *dev) >> +static void __netdev_watchdog_down(struct net_device *dev) > > This patch will not apply if I apply your symbol export patch because > the context above this function will be different. > > Please don't do this. > Yeah, I didn't know how to handle this properly: I kept both patches separated because the symbol export should go to stable and this one not. Is that OK to have only a ("initial") subset of a series aimed for stable ?