[PATCH v2 0/2] fix void function returning a value

[Bruce Richardson]

On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 01:23:15PM +0100, David Marchand wrote:
> Hello Bruce,
> 
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:21 PM Andre Muezerie
> <andremue at linux.microsoft.com> wrote:
> >
> > v2:
> >  * Updated commit messages to follow standard format.
> >
> > This patch avoids warnings like the one below emitted by MSVC, and is
> > needed to get the code to compile cleanly with MSVC.
> >
> > ../drivers/common/idpf/idpf_common_rxtx_avx512.c(139):
> >     warning C4098: 'idpf_singleq_rearm':
> >     'void' function returning a value
> >
> > Andre Muezerie (2):
> >   drivers/common: fix void function returning a value
> >   drivers/net: fix void function returning a value
> >
> >  drivers/common/idpf/idpf_common_rxtx_avx512.c | 12 ++++++++----
> >  drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_avx2.c         |  2 +-
> >  drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_avx512.c       |  2 +-
> >  drivers/net/iavf/iavf_rxtx_vec_avx2.c         |  2 +-
> >  drivers/net/ice/ice_rxtx_vec_avx2.c           |  2 +-
> >  5 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> I see the series is delegated to the main repo (Thomas).
> 
> This touches only Intel drivers and the code deduplication effort you
> started may conflict (though trivially) with such changes depending on
> when it lands.
> 
> Would you mind merging this fixes from Andre through the
> next-net-intel tree, right now?
> If so, please mark it as delegated to you in patchwork.
> 
> 
> Thanks!
> 
Hi David,

the code deduplication effort patchsets are similarly delegated to the main
repo. I was assuming this was deliberate, but perhaps it isn't? I'm ok to
take these patches in next-net-intel, but just would like to confirm that
neither you, Thomas or Stephen (as net maintainer) want to review the dedup
work ahead of that initial merge?

/Bruce