[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1366367073.3205.105.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 03:24:33 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Dmitry Kozlov <xeb@...l.ru>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] GRE: Use IS_ERR_OR_NULL in gre_gso_segment
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,... ?
Anyway I presume this is a net-next patch ?
Thanks
--
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