On Fri, 31 Jan 2020 06:54:53 -0800 Eric Dumazet <edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 4:24 AM <sjpark@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > From: SeongJae Park <sjpark@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Commit ec94c2696f0b ("tcp/dccp: avoid one atomic operation for timewait
> > hashdance") mistakenly erased a comment for the second step of
> > `inet_twsk_hashdance()`. This commit restores it for better
> > readability.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: SeongJae Park <sjpark@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > net/ipv4/inet_timewait_sock.c | 1 +
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/ipv4/inet_timewait_sock.c b/net/ipv4/inet_timewait_sock.c
> > index c411c87ae865..fbfcd63cc170 100644
> > --- a/net/ipv4/inet_timewait_sock.c
> > +++ b/net/ipv4/inet_timewait_sock.c
> > @@ -120,6 +120,7 @@ void inet_twsk_hashdance(struct inet_timewait_sock *tw, struct sock *sk,
> >
> > spin_lock(lock);
> >
> > + /* Step 2: Hash TW into tcp ehash chain. */
>
> This comment adds no value, please do not bring it back.
>
> net-next is closed, now is not the time for cosmetic changes.
>
> Also take a look at Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst
Thank you for this kind reference. Will drop this in next spin.
Thanks,
SeongJae Park
>
