[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200908104719.0b8aced3@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2020 10:47:19 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Dan Murphy <dmurphy@...com>
Cc: <davem@...emloft.net>, <andrew@...n.ch>, <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
<hkallweit1@...il.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 3/3] net: dp83869: Add speed optimization
feature
On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 09:07:22 -0500 Dan Murphy wrote:
> On 9/5/20 1:38 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 06:42:59 -0500 Dan Murphy wrote:
> >> +static int dp83869_set_downshift(struct phy_device *phydev, u8 cnt)
> >> +{
> >> + int val, count;
> >> +
> >> + if (cnt > DP83869_DOWNSHIFT_8_COUNT)
> >> + return -E2BIG;
> > ERANGE
>
> This is not checking a range but making sure it is not bigger then 8.
>
> IMO I would use ERANGE if the check was a boundary check for upper and
> lower bounds.
Yeah, ERANGE is not perfect, but the strerror for E2BIG is
"Argument list too long" - IDK if users seeing that will know that it
means the value is too large. Perhaps we should stick to EINVAL?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists