[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3f27f154-c770-72bf-c76f-f7375089add8@nvidia.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 18:16:08 +0300
From: Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...dia.com>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>,
Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...dia.com>,
Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: bridge: propagate error code and extack
from br_mc_disabled_update
On 14/04/2021 18:13, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 05:58:04PM +0300, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:
>>> @@ -3607,7 +3619,7 @@ int br_multicast_toggle(struct net_bridge *br, unsigned long val)
>>> br_multicast_leave_snoopers(br);
>>> }
>>>
>>> - return 0;
>>> + return err;
>>
>> Here won't you return EOPNOTSUPP even though everything above was successful ?
>> I mean if br_mc_disabled_update() returns -EOPNOTSUPP it will just be returned
>> and the caller would think there was an error.
>>
>> Did you try running the bridge selftests with this patch ?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Nik
>
> Thanks, this is a good point. I think I should just do this instead:
> if (err == -EOPNOTSUPP)
> err = 0;
> if (err)
> ...
>
> And I haven't run the bridge selftests. You are talking about:
> tools/testing/selftests/net/forwarding/bridge_{igmp,mld}.sh
> right?
>
Yeah, but it's nice to run all of the bridge selftests in there, sometimes
unexpected breakages can show up.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists