Phil Sutter <phil@xxxxxx> wrote: > > void __nf_ct_refresh_acct(struct nf_conn *ct, enum ip_conntrack_info ctinfo, > > const struct sk_buff *skb, > > - unsigned long extra_jiffies, int do_acct); > > + u32, bool do_acct); > > Maybe not worth a respin, but this mix of named and unnamed parameters > in function prototype is probably not intentional. Right, its not -- I don't plan to send a v2 though.
