On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Chen Gang <[email protected]> wrote: > > Both 'transport_header' and 'mac_header' are u16, which are never equal > to '~0U'. > > So need use '(u16) ~0U' instead of '~0U'. > > The related warning (with EXTRA_CFLAGS=-W ARCH=m68k for allmodconfig) > include/linux/skbuff.h:1587:2: warning: comparison is always true due to > limited range of data type [-Wtype-limits] > ... > > Use meaningful macro instead of hard code number, and better to > initialize 'skb->transport_header' in __alloc_skb_head(), too.
Looks okay. Couple of questions below. > --- a/include/linux/skbuff.h > +++ b/include/linux/skbuff.h > @@ -40,6 +40,8 @@ > #define CHECKSUM_COMPLETE 2 > #define CHECKSUM_PARTIAL 3 > > +#define SKB_HEADER_UNSET_16 ((unsigned short) ~0U) Isn't better to use the same type as used in the structure description? > --- a/net/core/skbuff.c > +++ b/net/core/skbuff.c > @@ -200,7 +200,8 @@ struct sk_buff *__alloc_skb_head(gfp_t gfp_mask, int node) > atomic_set(&skb->users, 1); > > #ifdef NET_SKBUFF_DATA_USES_OFFSET > - skb->mac_header = (__u16) ~0U; > + skb->mac_header = SKB_HEADER_UNSET_16; > + skb->transport_header = SKB_HEADER_UNSET_16; Is it correct to assign transport_header here as well? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
