----- Original Message ----- > On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 15:19:28 +0200 > Mohammed Gamal <mgamal@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > This condition already uses an object of type ipv6hdr in the line above. > > Use the object directly instead of calling ipv6_hdr > > > > Signed-off-by: Mohammed Gamal <mgamal@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/net/hyperv/netvsc_drv.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/hyperv/netvsc_drv.c > > b/drivers/net/hyperv/netvsc_drv.c > > index 63c98bb..06d591c 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/hyperv/netvsc_drv.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/hyperv/netvsc_drv.c > > @@ -339,7 +339,7 @@ static u32 net_checksum_info(struct sk_buff *skb) > > > > if (ip6->nexthdr == IPPROTO_TCP) > > return TRANSPORT_INFO_IPV6_TCP; > > - else if (ipv6_hdr(skb)->nexthdr == IPPROTO_UDP) > > + else if (ip6->nexthdr == IPPROTO_UDP) > > return TRANSPORT_INFO_IPV6_UDP; > > } > > > > Patch looks fine. > Network patches go through netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx not linux driver mailing > list. > I will add it to my next patch of patches that are going to netdev for > net-next. > Thanks for the heads up. Will take that into consideration next time. It's worth pointing out that MAINTAINERS points that files under drivers/net/hyperv are to be sent to devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. Perhaps that should be updated. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
