netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 5/7] net: bonding: Add extack messages for some enslave failures

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:   Wed, 4 Oct 2017 20:04:28 +0200
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:     David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, j.vosburgh@...il.com, vfalico@...il.com,
        andy@...yhouse.net, jiri@...lanox.com, idosch@...lanox.com,
        davem@...emloft.net, bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 5/7] net: bonding: Add extack messages for some
 enslave failures

Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 05:35:46PM CEST, dsahern@...il.com wrote:
>On 10/3/17 11:38 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 06:58:52AM CEST, dsahern@...il.com wrote:
>>> A number of bond_enslave errors are logged using the netdev_err API.
>>> Return those messages to userspace via the extack facility.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c | 12 ++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>>> index bc92307c2082..6688dc9154e0 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>>> @@ -1348,12 +1348,15 @@ int bond_enslave(struct net_device *bond_dev, struct net_device *slave_dev,
>>>
>>> 	/* already in-use? */
>>> 	if (netdev_is_rx_handler_busy(slave_dev)) {
>>> +		NL_SET_ERR_MSG(extack,
>>> +			       "Device is in use and cannot be enslaved");
>> 
>> Please don't do this kind of wrapping. Just let the string be on the
>> same line.
>> 
>
>Ok, I will do that for bonding only since it is the existing style.

I don't believe you need to do this wrap for any code. Just don't wrap.
General code stype says no wrap for strings :)