On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 9:44 AM Paul Moore <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 7:09 PM James Morris <jmorris@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I'm not keen on adding a parameter which nobody is using. Perhaps a note > > in the header instead? > > On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 6:14 AM Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Please at least change to the struct flowi to flowi_common if we're > > not adding a family field. > > It did feel a bit weird adding a (currently) unused parameter, so I > can understand the concern, I just worry that a comment in the code > will be easily overlooked. I also thought about passing a pointer to > the nested flowi_common struct, but it doesn't appear that this is > done anywhere else in the stack so it felt wrong to do it here. With the merge window behind us, where do stand on this? I see the ACK from Casey and some grumbling about adding an unused parameter (which is a valid argument, I just feel the alternative is worse), but I haven't seen any serious NACKs. Any objections or other strong feelings to me merging this via the selinux/next branch? -- paul moore www.paul-moore.com
