From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Gao Feng" Subject: RE: [PATCH nf-next 1/1] netfilter: udplite4: Remove duplicated udplite4 declaration Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2017 09:58:50 +0800 Message-ID: <002401d2adb0$2bd4a050$837de0f0$@foxmail.com> References: <1491355395-52913-1-git-send-email-gfree.wind@foxmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: , , Return-path: Received: from smtpbg298.qq.com ([184.105.67.102]:45429 "EHLO smtpbg298.qq.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752053AbdDEB6x (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Apr 2017 21:58:53 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1491355395-52913-1-git-send-email-gfree.wind@foxmail.com> Content-Language: zh-cn Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi, > -----Original Message----- > From: gfree.wind@foxmail.com [mailto:gfree.wind@foxmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, April 5, 2017 9:23 AM > To: pablo@netfilter.org; netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org > Cc: Gao Feng > Subject: [PATCH nf-next 1/1] netfilter: udplite4: Remove duplicated udplite4 > declaration > > From: Gao Feng > > There are two nf_conntrack_l4proto_udp4 declarations in the head file > nf_conntrack_ipv4.h. Now remove one which is not enbraced by the macro > CONFIG_NF_CT_PROTO_UDPLITE. > > Signed-off-by: Gao Feng > --- > include/net/netfilter/ipv4/nf_conntrack_ipv4.h | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/include/net/netfilter/ipv4/nf_conntrack_ipv4.h > b/include/net/netfilter/ipv4/nf_conntrack_ipv4.h > index 6ff3281..919e4e8 100644 > --- a/include/net/netfilter/ipv4/nf_conntrack_ipv4.h > +++ b/include/net/netfilter/ipv4/nf_conntrack_ipv4.h > @@ -14,7 +14,6 @@ > > extern struct nf_conntrack_l4proto nf_conntrack_l4proto_tcp4; extern > struct nf_conntrack_l4proto nf_conntrack_l4proto_udp4; -extern struct > nf_conntrack_l4proto nf_conntrack_l4proto_udplite4; extern struct > nf_conntrack_l4proto nf_conntrack_l4proto_icmp; #ifdef > CONFIG_NF_CT_PROTO_DCCP extern struct nf_conntrack_l4proto > nf_conntrack_l4proto_dccp4; > -- > 1.9.1 > Sorry, please ignore this patch. Because I find there is another duplicated declaration in IPv6 codes. So I have sent v2 patch already. Regards Feng