[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20241018094139.GD1697@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2024 10:41:39 +0100
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>
Cc: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>, Jussi Maki <joamaki@...il.com>,
Jay Vosburgh <jv@...sburgh.net>,
Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@...ckwall.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 net-next 2/3] bonding: use correct return value
On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 12:46:18AM +0000, Hangbin Liu wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 04:47:19PM +0200, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> > > diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
> > > index f0f76b6ac8be..6887a867fe8b 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
> > > @@ -5699,7 +5699,7 @@ static int bond_xdp_set(struct net_device *dev, struct bpf_prog *prog,
> > > if (dev_xdp_prog_count(slave_dev) > 0) {
> > > SLAVE_NL_ERR(dev, slave_dev, extack,
> > > "Slave has XDP program loaded, please unload before enslaving");
> > > - err = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > > + err = -EEXIST;
> >
> > Hmm, this has been UAPI since kernel 5.15, so can we really change it
> > now? What's the purpose of changing it, anyway?
>
> I just think it should return EXIST when the error is "Slave has XDP program
> loaded". No special reason. If all others think we should not change it, I
> can drop this patch.
Hi Toke,
Could you add some colour to what extent user's might rely on this error code?
Basically I think that if they do then we shouldn't change this.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists