From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] rxrpc: remove redundant variables 'xcall','sp'
 and 'did_discard'
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2018 17:19:12 +0800
Message-ID: <22b396e6-1e8d-cfc1-8dfd-955ca23f7db8@huawei.com>
References: <20180801073251.9808-1-yuehaibing@huawei.com>
 <15081.1533112094@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: <davem@davemloft.net>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-afs@lists.infradead.org>
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <15081.1533112094@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org


On 2018/8/1 16:28, David Howells wrote:
> YueHaibing <yuehaibing@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
>>  		while (*pp) {
>>  			parent = *pp;
>> -			xcall = rb_entry(parent, struct rxrpc_call, sock_node);
>>  			if (user_call_ID < call->user_call_ID)
>>  				pp = &(*pp)->rb_left;
>>  			else if (user_call_ID > call->user_call_ID)
> 
> No, this is an actual bug.  The if-conditions should be using xcall-> not
> call->.

yes, I will post a new patch, thanks.

> 
>> -		sp = rxrpc_skb(skb);
> 
> Yeah, that's fine.
> 
>> -	did_discard = true;
> 
> Hmmm...  It looks like I intended something with this, but I don't remember
> what now.  I think it can be removed.
> 
> David
> 
> .
>