[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20130419.142852.1914290650706288260.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 14:28:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: eric.dumazet@...il.com
Cc: horms@...ge.net.au, netdev@...r.kernel.org, xeb@...l.ru
Subject: Re: [PATCH] GRE: Use IS_ERR_OR_NULL in gre_gso_segment
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 03:24:33 -0700
> On Fri, 2013-04-19 at 15:48 +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>
>> ---
>> net/ipv4/gre.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/net/ipv4/gre.c b/net/ipv4/gre.c
>> index d2d5a99..0ae998b 100644
>> --- a/net/ipv4/gre.c
>> +++ b/net/ipv4/gre.c
>> @@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ static struct sk_buff *gre_gso_segment(struct sk_buff *skb,
>> /* segment inner packet. */
>> enc_features = skb->dev->hw_enc_features & netif_skb_features(skb);
>> segs = skb_mac_gso_segment(skb, enc_features);
>> - if (!segs || IS_ERR(segs))
>> + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(segs))
>> goto out;
>>
>> skb = segs;
>
> Hi Simon
>
> AFAIK I would change things so that NULL is not a possible value.
>
> I don't really like IS_ERR_OR_NULL() because it hides some lazyness of
> ours, and is more expensive (2 tests)
>
> If we return NULL for an error, why not instead return -Esomething,
> since caller is OK to get -ENOMEM,-Exxxxx,... ?
Sometimes IS_ERR_OR_NULL is appropriate, but not here, since the caller
can more easily just provide good error codes all the time instead of
sometimes returning nULL.
--
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