This function is only used within pm_netlink.c now.

Signed-off-by: Mat Martineau <mathew.j.martineau@linux.intel.com>
---
 net/mptcp/pm_netlink.c | 6 +++---
 net/mptcp/protocol.h   | 3 ---
 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/mptcp/pm_netlink.c b/net/mptcp/pm_netlink.c
index 050eea231528..30b974801d51 100644
--- a/net/mptcp/pm_netlink.c
+++ b/net/mptcp/pm_netlink.c
@@ -654,9 +654,9 @@ void mptcp_pm_nl_addr_send_ack(struct mptcp_sock *msk)
 	}
 }
 
-int mptcp_pm_nl_mp_prio_send_ack(struct mptcp_sock *msk,
-				 struct mptcp_addr_info *addr,
-				 u8 bkup)
+static int mptcp_pm_nl_mp_prio_send_ack(struct mptcp_sock *msk,
+					struct mptcp_addr_info *addr,
+					u8 bkup)
 {
 	struct mptcp_subflow_context *subflow;
 
diff --git a/net/mptcp/protocol.h b/net/mptcp/protocol.h
index 7379ab580a7e..284fdcec067e 100644
--- a/net/mptcp/protocol.h
+++ b/net/mptcp/protocol.h
@@ -736,9 +736,6 @@ void mptcp_pm_nl_addr_send_ack(struct mptcp_sock *msk);
 void mptcp_pm_rm_addr_received(struct mptcp_sock *msk,
 			       const struct mptcp_rm_list *rm_list);
 void mptcp_pm_mp_prio_received(struct sock *sk, u8 bkup);
-int mptcp_pm_nl_mp_prio_send_ack(struct mptcp_sock *msk,
-				 struct mptcp_addr_info *addr,
-				 u8 bkup);
 void mptcp_pm_mp_fail_received(struct sock *sk, u64 fail_seq);
 void mptcp_pm_free_anno_list(struct mptcp_sock *msk);
 bool mptcp_pm_sport_in_anno_list(struct mptcp_sock *msk, const struct sock *sk);
-- 
2.33.0

Hi Mat,

On 07/10/2021 02:06, Mat Martineau wrote:
> This function is only used within pm_netlink.c now.

Good catch, thank you for the patch!

Do you think we need a "Fixes" tag? It looks like it has never been used
outside pm_netlink.c.

But maybe we don't want a "Fixes" tag because we don't want such patch
to be backported to stable? Or maybe we want to minimise the differences
by backporting "not risky" patches and ease future backports?

If we want one, I would suggest:

  Fixes: 067065422fcd ("mptcp: add the outgoing MP_PRIO support")

Cheers,
Matt
-- 
Tessares | Belgium | Hybrid Access Solutions
www.tessares.net

On Thu, 7 Oct 2021, Matthieu Baerts wrote:

> Hi Mat,
>
> On 07/10/2021 02:06, Mat Martineau wrote:
>> This function is only used within pm_netlink.c now.
>
> Good catch, thank you for the patch!
>
> Do you think we need a "Fixes" tag? It looks like it has never been used
> outside pm_netlink.c.
>
> But maybe we don't want a "Fixes" tag because we don't want such patch
> to be backported to stable? Or maybe we want to minimise the differences
> by backporting "not risky" patches and ease future backports?
>

I hadn't included the Fixes tag for these reasons :)

I think it's better to leave it off, as it's such a minor thing.

> If we want one, I would suggest:
>
>  Fixes: 067065422fcd ("mptcp: add the outgoing MP_PRIO support")
>


--
Mat Martineau
Intel

Hi Mat,

On 07/10/2021 17:04, Mat Martineau wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Oct 2021, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> 
>> Hi Mat,
>>
>> On 07/10/2021 02:06, Mat Martineau wrote:
>>> This function is only used within pm_netlink.c now.
>>
>> Good catch, thank you for the patch!
>>
>> Do you think we need a "Fixes" tag? It looks like it has never been used
>> outside pm_netlink.c.
>>
>> But maybe we don't want a "Fixes" tag because we don't want such patch
>> to be backported to stable? Or maybe we want to minimise the differences
>> by backporting "not risky" patches and ease future backports?
>>
> 
> I hadn't included the Fixes tag for these reasons :)
> 
> I think it's better to leave it off, as it's such a minor thing.

From what I got from "stable" maintainers, it looks like we should add
the "Fixes" tag when something is fixed -- i.e. for all patches except
for new features and related refactoring patches -- and they take the
decision if backporting a patch would make sense for them or not.

Do you mind if I add the "Fixes" tag and put the commit in the "net"
section?

Cheers,
Matt
-- 
Tessares | Belgium | Hybrid Access Solutions
www.tessares.net

On Thu, 14 Oct 2021, Matthieu Baerts wrote:

> Hi Mat,
>
> On 07/10/2021 17:04, Mat Martineau wrote:
>> On Thu, 7 Oct 2021, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Mat,
>>>
>>> On 07/10/2021 02:06, Mat Martineau wrote:
>>>> This function is only used within pm_netlink.c now.
>>>
>>> Good catch, thank you for the patch!
>>>
>>> Do you think we need a "Fixes" tag? It looks like it has never been used
>>> outside pm_netlink.c.
>>>
>>> But maybe we don't want a "Fixes" tag because we don't want such patch
>>> to be backported to stable? Or maybe we want to minimise the differences
>>> by backporting "not risky" patches and ease future backports?
>>>
>>
>> I hadn't included the Fixes tag for these reasons :)
>>
>> I think it's better to leave it off, as it's such a minor thing.
>
> From what I got from "stable" maintainers, it looks like we should add
> the "Fixes" tag when something is fixed -- i.e. for all patches except
> for new features and related refactoring patches -- and they take the
> decision if backporting a patch would make sense for them or not.
>
> Do you mind if I add the "Fixes" tag and put the commit in the "net"
> section?
>

Don't mind at all, go ahead and add it.

--
Mat Martineau
Intel

Hi Mat,

On 07/10/2021 02:06, Mat Martineau wrote:
> This function is only used within pm_netlink.c now.

Thank you for your patch!

Now in our tree (for net-next) with the Fixes tag and my RvB one:

- 7f101302f759: mptcp: Make mptcp_pm_nl_mp_prio_send_ack() static

- Results: 944d8c159e22..ca8552485b9e

Builds and tests are now in progress:



https://cirrus-ci.com/github/multipath-tcp/mptcp_net-next/export/20211014T181928

https://github.com/multipath-tcp/mptcp_net-next/actions/workflows/build-validation.yml?query=branch:export/20211014T181928

Cheers,
Matt
-- 
Tessares | Belgium | Hybrid Access Solutions
www.tessares.net