Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley
        Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United
        Kingdom.
        Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903
From:   David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <Y20A33ya17l/MqxU@lunn.ch>
References: <Y20A33ya17l/MqxU@lunn.ch> <166807341463.2904467.10141806642379634063.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Cc:     dhowells@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
        Marc Dionne <marc.dionne@auristor.com>,
        linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] rxrpc: Fix missing IPV6 #ifdef
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <3080952.1668089385.1@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date:   Thu, 10 Nov 2022 14:09:45 +0000
Message-ID: <3080953.1668089385@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Precedence: bulk

Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch> wrote:

> > +#ifdef CONFIG_AF_RXRPC_IPV6
> >  	return ipv6_icmp_error(sk, skb, err, port, info, payload);
> > +#endif
> 
> Can this be if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_AF_RXRPC_IPV6) {} rather than
> #ifdef? It gives better build testing.

Sure.  Does it actually make that much of a difference?  I guess the
declaration is there even if IPV6 is disabled.

David