[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANn89iJNTgXsRv0Wgp4V=TUws-d4Mc4FwR4kUBy+r8+UxWC06Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2021 11:14:50 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...dia.com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
George McCollister <george.mccollister@...il.com>,
Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>,
Jay Vosburgh <j.vosburgh@...il.com>,
Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...il.com>,
Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Taehee Yoo <ap420073@...il.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>, Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 net-next 08/18] net: make dev_get_stats return void
On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 1:20 AM Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com> wrote:
>
> From: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
>
> After commit 28172739f0a2 ("net: fix 64 bit counters on 32 bit arches"),
> dev_get_stats got an additional argument for storage of statistics. At
> this point, dev_get_stats could return either the passed "storage"
> argument, or the output of .ndo_get_stats64.
>
> Then commit caf586e5f23c ("net: add a core netdev->rx_dropped counter")
> came, and the output of .ndo_get_stats64 (still returning a pointer to
> struct rtnl_link_stats64) started being ignored.
>
> Then came commit bc1f44709cf2 ("net: make ndo_get_stats64 a void
> function") which made .ndo_get_stats64 stop returning anything.
>
> So now, dev_get_stats always reports the "storage" pointer received as
> argument. This is useless. Some drivers are dealing with unnecessary
> complexity due to this, so refactor them to ignore the return value
> completely.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
> ---
>
This seems like a lot of code churn.
Ultimately we need this function to return an error code, so why keep
this patch with a void return ?
Please squash your patches a bit, to avoid having 18 patches to review.
Additionally I would suggest a __must_check attribute on
dev_get_stats() to make sure we converted all callers.
I can not convince myself that after your patches, bonding does the
right thing...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists