netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 05/13] selftests: ncdevmem: Unify error handling

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAHS8izP7MENG+q3y00LbAhzkP9yuLkC6NV3Bs77aQ5nw6YK4AA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2024 13:35:50 -0700
From: Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>
To: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, 
	kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 05/13] selftests: ncdevmem: Unify error handling

On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 10:13 AM Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me> wrote:
>
> There is a bunch of places where error() calls look out of place.
> Use the same error(1, errno, ...) pattern everywhere.
>
> Cc: Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>
> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/net/ncdevmem.c | 12 ++++++------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/ncdevmem.c b/tools/testing/selftests/net/ncdevmem.c
> index a20f40adfde8..c0da2b2e077f 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/ncdevmem.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/ncdevmem.c
> @@ -332,32 +332,32 @@ int do_server(struct memory_buffer *mem)
>
>         ret = inet_pton(server_sin.sin_family, server_ip, &server_sin.sin_addr);
>         if (socket < 0)
> -               error(79, 0, "%s: [FAIL, create socket]\n", TEST_PREFIX);
> +               error(1, 0, "%s: [FAIL, create socket]\n", TEST_PREFIX);
>
>         socket_fd = socket(server_sin.sin_family, SOCK_STREAM, 0);
>         if (socket < 0)
> -               error(errno, errno, "%s: [FAIL, create socket]\n", TEST_PREFIX);
> +               error(1, errno, "%s: [FAIL, create socket]\n", TEST_PREFIX);
>

To be honest this was a bit intentional. For example here, I want to
see what errno socket() failed with; it's a clue to why it failed.

I guess you're not actually removing that, right? You're making the
return code of ncdevmem 1, but it will still print the errno of the
subfailure? That sounds fine.

Isn't it a bit more standard for the sub errno to be the return of the
parent process. But not opposed. If you think this is better we can go
for it.


--
Thanks,
Mina