In the pure assignment case, the earlier zeroing is
still in effect.

David S. Miller raised concerns if the ifs are there to avoid
dirtying cachelines. I came to these conclusions:

> We'll be dirty it anyway (now that I check), the first "real" statement
> in tcp_rcv_established is:
>
>       tp->rx_opt.saw_tstamp = 0;
>
> ...that'll land on the same dword. :-/
>
> I suppose the blocks are there just because they had more complexity
> inside when they had to calculate the eff_sacks too (maybe it would
> have been better to just remove them in that drop-patch so you would
> have had less head-ache :-)).
Signed-off-by: NIlpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@helsinki.fi>
Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>