[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YZRUW6wfMdI1aN1o@Laptop-X1>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2021 09:01:15 +0800
From: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Jay Vosburgh <j.vosburgh@...il.com>,
Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...il.com>,
Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
Jarod Wilson <jarod@...hat.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Denis Kirjanov <dkirjanov@...e.de>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] Bonding: add missed_max option
On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 12:00:58PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Nov 2021 16:48:40 +0800 Hangbin Liu wrote:
> > + [IFLA_BOND_MISSED_MAX] = { .type = NLA_U32 },
>
> Why NLA_U32...
>
> >
> > static const struct nla_policy bond_slave_policy[IFLA_BOND_SLAVE_MAX + 1] = {
> > @@ -453,6 +454,15 @@ static int bond_changelink(struct net_device *bond_dev, struct nlattr *tb[],
> > return err;
> > }
> >
> > + if (data[IFLA_BOND_MISSED_MAX]) {
> > + int missed_max = nla_get_u8(data[IFLA_BOND_MISSED_MAX]);
>
> If you read and write a u8?
Ah, that's a typo. I planed to use nla_get_u32(). But looks NLA_U8 also should
be enough. WDYT?
Thanks
Hangbin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists