@@ -157,7 +157,7 @@ static netdev_tx_t wg_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev)
} else {
struct sk_buff *segs = skb_gso_segment(skb, 0);
- if (unlikely(IS_ERR(segs))) {
+ if (IS_ERR(segs)) {
ret = PTR_ERR(segs);
goto err_peer;
}
@@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ static int send4(struct wg_device *wg, struct sk_buff *skb,
ip_rt_put(rt);
rt = ip_route_output_flow(sock_net(sock), &fl, sock);
}
- if (unlikely(IS_ERR(rt))) {
+ if (IS_ERR(rt)) {
ret = PTR_ERR(rt);
net_dbg_ratelimited("%s: No route to %pISpfsc, error %d\n",
wg->dev->name, &endpoint->addr, ret);
@@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ static int send6(struct wg_device *wg, struct sk_buff *skb,
}
dst = ipv6_stub->ipv6_dst_lookup_flow(sock_net(sock), sock, &fl,
NULL);
- if (unlikely(IS_ERR(dst))) {
+ if (IS_ERR(dst)) {
ret = PTR_ERR(dst);
net_dbg_ratelimited("%s: No route to %pISpfsc, error %d\n",
wg->dev->name, &endpoint->addr, ret);
The definition of IS_ERR() already applies the unlikely() notation when checking the error status of the passed pointer. For this reason there is no need to have the same notation outside of IS_ERR() itself. Clean up code by removing redundant notation. Signed-off-by: Antonio Quartulli <a@unstable.cc> --- drivers/net/wireguard/device.c | 2 +- drivers/net/wireguard/socket.c | 4 ++-- 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)