[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YV+UgAEYz2GH8LIW@unreal>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2021 03:44:48 +0300
From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Ido Schimmel <idosch@...dia.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
mlxsw@...dia.com, Moshe Shemesh <moshe@...dia.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>,
Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@...wei.com>,
Shay Drory <shayd@...dia.com>,
Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>,
Yisen Zhuang <yisen.zhuang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/5] devlink: Reduce struct devlink exposure
On Thu, Oct 07, 2021 at 03:58:00PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Oct 2021 09:55:15 +0300
> Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> > +void *devlink_priv(struct devlink *devlink)
> > +{
> > + BUG_ON(!devlink);
>
> Do we really want to bring down the kernel in this case?
It was before.
>
> Can't we just have:
>
> if (WARN_ON(!devlink))
> return NULL;
> ?
Callers of devlink_priv() are not prepared to have NULL here, they don't
check return value at all,and this BUG_ON() can't happen at all.
>
> Same for the below as well.
I can send followup patch.
Thanks
>
> -- Steve
>
> > + return &devlink->priv;
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(devlink_priv);
> > +
> > +struct devlink *priv_to_devlink(void *priv)
> > +{
> > + BUG_ON(!priv);
> > + return container_of(priv, struct devlink, priv);
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(priv_to_devlink);
> > +
> > +struct device *devlink_to_dev(const struct devlink *devlink)
> > +{
> > + return devlink->dev;
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(devlink_to_dev);
> > +
Powered by blists - more mailing lists