[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081125111423.0b953570@extreme>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 11:14:23 -0800
From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
To: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1b/2] tc: check for errors in gen_rate_estimator
creation
On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 20:05:46 +0100
Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net> wrote:
> Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > The functions gen_new_estimator and gen_replace_estimator can return errors,
> > but they were being ignored.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
> >
> >
> > ---
> > --- a/net/sched/sch_api.c 2008-11-25 10:51:47.000000000 -0800
> > +++ b/net/sched/sch_api.c 2008-11-25 10:54:16.000000000 -0800
> > @@ -887,6 +887,14 @@ static int qdisc_change(struct Qdisc *sc
> > return err;
> > }
> >
> > + if (tca[TCA_RATE]) {
> > + err = gen_replace_estimator(&sch->bstats, &sch->rate_est,
> > + qdisc_root_sleeping_lock(sch),
> > + tca[TCA_RATE]);
> > + if (err)
> > + return err;
>
> This appears to have the same problem as in HFSC unless I missed more
> code movement - changes to the qdisc have already been performed.
That is not fixable since both change and replace_estimator are non-unwindable,
and either one could fail. Could split checking and initialization out of gen_new_estimator,
but is it worth it??
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists