From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: xfrm: xfrm_policy: fix inline not at beginning of declaration Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2014 00:57:53 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20140108.005753.803063221953593992.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1389133227-11086-1-git-send-email-dborkman@redhat.com> <20140107.183412.1584306758322996233.davem@davemloft.net> <20140108055536.GX31491@secunet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dborkman@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: steffen.klassert@secunet.com Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:47722 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751291AbaAHF5z (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Jan 2014 00:57:55 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20140108055536.GX31491@secunet.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Steffen Klassert Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2014 06:55:36 +0100 > On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 06:34:12PM -0500, David Miller wrote: >> From: Daniel Borkmann >> Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 23:20:27 +0100 >> >> > Fix three warnings related to: >> > >> > net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c:1644:1: warning: 'inline' is not at beginning of declaration [-Wold-style-declaration] >> > net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c:1656:1: warning: 'inline' is not at beginning of declaration [-Wold-style-declaration] >> > net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c:1668:1: warning: 'inline' is not at beginning of declaration [-Wold-style-declaration] >> > >> > Just removing the inline keyword is sufficient as the compiler will >> > decide on its own about inlining or not. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann >> >> Applied. > > I have a fix for this warnings in the ipsec-next tree too: > > commit 2f3ea9a95c58fd0e4bed18a9c9dfe53739fee3b2 > Author: Weilong Chen > Date: Tue Dec 24 09:43:50 2013 +0800 > > xfrm: checkpatch erros with inline keyword position > > Signed-off-by: Weilong Chen > Signed-off-by: Steffen Klassert > > > Should I revert it, or do you want to solve the conflict when > I send the ipsec-next pull request? Just leave it alone, I'll take care of it at the next merge.