dccp_li_hist_interval_new doesn't need the last two parameters as the logic
doesn't belong there and makes dccp_li_update_li more confusing as to where
the structure values come from.
And of course it never hurts to reduce stack usage.
Signed-off-by: Ian McDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Gerrit Renker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
diff --git a/net/dccp/ccids/lib/loss_interval.c
b/net/dccp/ccids/lib/loss_interval.c
index 9e7fbed..2001dd7 100644
--- a/net/dccp/ccids/lib/loss_interval.c
+++ b/net/dccp/ccids/lib/loss_interval.c
@@ -150,8 +150,6 @@ static int dccp_li_hist_interval_new(struct list_head *list,
list_add(&entry->dccplih_node, list);
}
- entry->dccplih_seqno = seq_nonloss;
- entry->dccplih_win_count = win_nonloss;
return 1;
}
@@ -272,6 +270,8 @@ void dccp_li_update_li(struct sock *sk)
head = list_entry(hcrx->ccid3hcrx_li_hist.next,
struct dccp_li_hist_entry, dccplih_node);
head->dccplih_interval = dccp_li_calc_first_li(sk);
+ head->dccplih_seqno = seq_nonloss;
+ head->dccplih_win_count = win_nonloss;
} else {
struct dccp_li_hist_entry *entry;
struct list_head *tail;
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dccp" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
