netdev - Re: [net-next v2 1/2] vxlan: Notify drivers for listening UDP port changes

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 29 Aug 2013 19:42:58 +0100
From:	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
To:	Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
CC:	<davem@...emloft.net>,
	Joseph Gasparakis <joseph.gasparakis@...el.com>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <gospo@...hat.com>,
	<sassmann@...hat.com>,
	"John Fastabend" <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>,
	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Subject: Re: [net-next v2 1/2] vxlan: Notify drivers for listening UDP port
 changes

On Thu, 2013-08-29 at 05:54 -0700, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
> From: Joseph Gasparakis <joseph.gasparakis@...el.com>
> 
> This patch adds two more ndo ops: ndo_add_rx_vxlan_port() and
> ndo_del_rx_vxlan_port().
[...]
> --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h
> +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> @@ -948,6 +948,18 @@ struct netdev_phys_port_id {
>   *	Called to get ID of physical port of this device. If driver does
>   *	not implement this, it is assumed that the hw is not able to have
>   *	multiple net devices on single physical port.
> + *
> + * int (*ndo_add_vxlan_port)(struct  net_device *dev,
> + *			      __u16 port);
> + *	Called by vxlan to notiy a driver about the UDP port that vxlan
> + *	is listnening to. It is called only when a new port starts listening.
> + *	The operation is protected by the vxlan_net->sock_lock.
> + *
> + * int (*ndo_del_vxlan_port)(struct  net_device *dev,
> + *			    __u16 port);
> + *	Called by vxlan to notify the driver about a UDP port of vxlan
> + *	that is not listening anymore. The operation is protected by
> + *	the vxlan_net->sock_lock.
>   */
>  struct net_device_ops {
>  	int			(*ndo_init)(struct net_device *dev);
> @@ -1078,6 +1090,10 @@ struct net_device_ops {
>  						      bool new_carrier);
>  	int			(*ndo_get_phys_port_id)(struct net_device *dev,
>  							struct netdev_phys_port_id *ppid);
> +	int			(*ndo_add_vxlan_port)(struct  net_device *dev,
> +						      __u16 port);
> +	int			(*ndo_del_vxlan_port)(struct  net_device *dev,
> +						      __u16 port);
>  };
[...]

I notice these are defined to return int, but the callers don't check
the return value.  Should they return void or do the callers need some
error handling?

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html