This does not cause any bug now because it has no users, but its body
contains two pointer definitions within a code block:
struct sk_buff *clone = _clone; \
struct sk_buff *skb = _skb; \
When calling the macro as DSA_SKB_CLONE(clone, skb), these variables
would obscure the arguments that the macro was called with, and the
initializers would be a no-op instead of doing their job (undefined
behavior, by the way, but GCC nicely puts NULL pointers instead).
So simply remove this broken macro and leave users to simply call
"DSA_SKB_CB(skb)->clone = clone" by hand when needed.
There is one functional difference when doing what I just suggested
above: the control block won't be transferred from the original skb into
the clone. Since there's no foreseen need for the control block in the
clone ATM, this is ok.
Fixes: b68b0dd0fb2d ("net: dsa: Keep private info in the skb->cb")
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Oltean <olte...@gmail.com>
---
include/net/dsa.h | 9 ---------
1 file changed, 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/net/dsa.h b/include/net/dsa.h
index 35ca1f2c6e28..1f6b8608b0b7 100644
--- a/include/net/dsa.h
+++ b/include/net/dsa.h
@@ -105,15 +105,6 @@ struct __dsa_skb_cb {
#define DSA_SKB_CB_PRIV(skb) \
((void *)(skb)->cb + offsetof(struct __dsa_skb_cb, priv))
-#define DSA_SKB_CB_CLONE(_clone, _skb) \
- { \
- struct sk_buff *clone = _clone; \
- struct sk_buff *skb = _skb; \
- \
- DSA_SKB_CB_COPY(clone, skb); \
- DSA_SKB_CB(skb)->clone = clone; \
- }
-
struct dsa_switch_tree {
struct list_head list;
--
2.17.1
