On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 02:24:29PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > From: Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > Since adding a new function to seq_file (seq_has_overflowed()) > there isn't any value for functions called from seq_show to > return anything. Remove the int returns of the various > print_tuple/<foo>_print_tuple functions. > > Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/p/f2e8cf8df433a197daa62cbaf124c900c708edc7.1412031505.git.joe@xxxxxxxxxxx > > Cc: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: netfilter-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Cc: coreteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> I replied to this yesterday, but it seems some spam filter also munched it. One comment below. > @@ -202,9 +203,8 @@ static int ct_seq_show(struct seq_file *s, void *v) > if (l4proto->print_conntrack) > l4proto->print_conntrack(s, ct); > > - if (print_tuple(s, &ct->tuplehash[IP_CT_DIR_ORIGINAL].tuple, > - l3proto, l4proto)) > - goto release; > + print_tuple(s, &ct->tuplehash[IP_CT_DIR_ORIGINAL].tuple, > + l3proto, l4proto); > > if (seq_print_acct(s, ct, IP_CT_DIR_ORIGINAL)) > goto release; seq_print_acct returns seq_printf which is now void. I guess you have to remove this check too. > @@ -213,9 +213,8 @@ static int ct_seq_show(struct seq_file *s, void *v) > if (seq_printf(s, "[UNREPLIED] ")) > goto release; > > - if (print_tuple(s, &ct->tuplehash[IP_CT_DIR_REPLY].tuple, > - l3proto, l4proto)) > - goto release; > + print_tuple(s, &ct->tuplehash[IP_CT_DIR_REPLY].tuple, > + l3proto, l4proto); > > if (seq_print_acct(s, ct, IP_CT_DIR_REPLY)) > goto release; And here. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
