> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joshi, Sreedevi <[email protected]>
> Sent: Friday, September 19, 2025 12:59 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]; Joshi, Sreedevi <[email protected]>; 
> Loktionov, Aleksandr <[email protected]>; Kitszel,
> Przemyslaw <[email protected]>
> Subject: [PATCH iwl-next] idpf: remove duplicate defines in IDPF_CAP_RSS
> 
Fixed inline.

> Remove duplicate defines from the OR operation when defining IDPF_CAP_RSS.
> 
> Duplicate definitions were introduced when IDPF_CAP_RSS was originally
> defined and were left behind and went unnoticed during a previous commit
> that renamed them. Review of the original out-of-tree code confirms these
> duplicates were the result of a typing error.
> 
> Remove the duplicates to clean up the code and avoid potential confusion.
> Also verify no other duplicate occurrences of these defines exist
> elsewhere in the codebase.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Aleksandr Loktionov <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Przemek Kitszel <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Sreedevi Joshi <[email protected]>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf.h | 2 --
>  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf.h 
> b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf.h
> index 0f320a2b92d2..21c50695348c 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf.h
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf.h
> @@ -732,13 +732,11 @@ static inline bool idpf_is_rdma_cap_ena(struct 
> idpf_adapter *adapter)
>  }
> 
>  #define IDPF_CAP_RSS (\
> -     VIRTCHNL2_FLOW_IPV4_TCP         |\
>       VIRTCHNL2_FLOW_IPV4_TCP         |\
>       VIRTCHNL2_FLOW_IPV4_UDP         |\
>       VIRTCHNL2_FLOW_IPV4_SCTP        |\
>       VIRTCHNL2_FLOW_IPV4_OTHER       |\
>       VIRTCHNL2_FLOW_IPV6_TCP         |\
> -     VIRTCHNL2_FLOW_IPV6_TCP         |\
>       VIRTCHNL2_FLOW_IPV6_UDP         |\
>       VIRTCHNL2_FLOW_IPV6_SCTP        |\
>       VIRTCHNL2_FLOW_IPV6_OTHER)
> --
> 2.25.1
Patch is meant for iwl-next. Missed specifying that on the subject line. Fixed 
now.
Thanks
Sreedevi 

Reply via email to