Re: [PATCH net-next] sctp: Remove commented out code

[Mateusz Polchlopek <mateusz.polchlopek@intel.com>]

On 2/11/2025 12:17 PM, Thorsten Blum wrote:
> On 11. Feb 2025, at 11:49, Mateusz Polchlopek wrote:
>> On 2/11/2025 11:20 AM, Thorsten Blum wrote:
>>> Remove commented out code.
>>> Signed-off-by: Thorsten Blum <thorsten.blum@linux.dev>
>>> ---
>>>   include/linux/sctp.h | 1 -
>>>   1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/sctp.h b/include/linux/sctp.h
>>> index 836a7e200f39..812011d8b67e 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/sctp.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/sctp.h
>>> @@ -222,7 +222,6 @@ struct sctp_datahdr {
>>>    __be16 stream;
>>>    __be16 ssn;
>>>    __u32 ppid;
>>> - /* __u8  payload[]; */
>>>   };
>>>     struct sctp_data_chunk {
>>
>> Hi Thorsten
>>
>> I don't think we want to remove that piece of code, please refer
>> to the discussion under the link:
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/cover.1681917361.git.lucien.xin@gmail.com/
> 
> Hm, the commit message (dbda0fba7a14) says payload was deleted because
> "the member is not even used anywhere," but it was just commented out.
> In the cover letter it then explains that "deleted" actually means
> "commented out."
> 
> However, I can't follow the reasoning in the cover letter either:
> 
> "Note that instead of completely deleting it, we just leave it as a
> comment in the struct, signalling to the reader that we do expect
> such variable parameters over there, as Marcelo suggested."
> 
> Where do I find Marcelo's suggestion and the "variable parameters over
> there?"
> 

That's good question, I can't find the Marcelo suggestion that author
mention. It's hard to find without links to previous series or
discussion :/

I guess it should be also commented by maintainers, I see that in the
Xin's thread Kuba also commented change with commenting out instead
of removing code. Let's wait

> Thanks,
> Thorsten