[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20221006122101.GD3328@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2022 14:21:01 +0200
From: Guillaume Nault <gnault@...hat.com>
To: Wojciech Drewek <wojciech.drewek@...el.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, dsahern@...il.com,
stephen@...workplumber.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH iproute2-next v2 3/3] f_flower: Introduce L2TPv3 support
On Wed, Oct 05, 2022 at 12:44:32PM +0200, Wojciech Drewek wrote:
> @@ -291,11 +293,16 @@ entry.
> .I TTL
> is an unsigned 8 bit value in decimal format.
> .TP
> +.BI l2tpv3_sid " LSID"
> +Match on L2TPv3 session id field transported over IP or IPv6.
I'd rather say either just 'over IP.' (any version), or
'over IPv4 or IPv6.' (both versions written explicitly).
> +static int flower_parse_l2tpv3(char *str, __be16 eth_type, __u8 ip_proto,
> + struct nlmsghdr *n)
> +{
> + __be32 sid;
> + int ret;
> +
> + if ((eth_type != htons(ETH_P_IP) && eth_type != htons(ETH_P_IPV6)) ||
Testing eth_type shouldn't be necessary here, since
flower_parse_ip_proto() should have already verified that eth_type is
compatible with IPPROTO_L2TP. So eth_type can even be dropped from
the function parameters. Also the error message probably doesn't need
to talk about the ethertype as flower_parse_ip_proto() should have
already complained.
Apart from that,
Reviewed-by: Guillaume Nault <gnault@...hat.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists