| Message ID | 20150121092235.GA19206@mwanda |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Delegated to: | David Miller |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, 21 Jan 2015 12:22:35 +0300 Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> wrote: > Static checkers complain that we should maybe set "ret" before we do the > "goto out;". They interpret the NULL return from br_port_get_rtnl() as > a failure and forgetting to set the error code is a common bug in this > situation. > > The code is confusing but it's actually correct. We are returning zero > deliberately. Let's re-write it a bit to be more clear. > > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> > > diff --git a/net/bridge/br_netlink.c b/net/bridge/br_netlink.c > index 528cf27..3875ea51 100644 > --- a/net/bridge/br_netlink.c > +++ b/net/bridge/br_netlink.c > @@ -311,17 +311,14 @@ errout: > int br_getlink(struct sk_buff *skb, u32 pid, u32 seq, > struct net_device *dev, u32 filter_mask) > { > - int err = 0; > struct net_bridge_port *port = br_port_get_rtnl(dev); > > if (!port && !(filter_mask & RTEXT_FILTER_BRVLAN) && > !(filter_mask & RTEXT_FILTER_BRVLAN_COMPRESSED)) > - goto out; > + return 0; > > - err = br_fill_ifinfo(skb, port, pid, seq, RTM_NEWLINK, NLM_F_MULTI, > - filter_mask, dev); > -out: > - return err; > + return br_fill_ifinfo(skb, port, pid, seq, RTM_NEWLINK, NLM_F_MULTI, > + filter_mask, dev); > } > > static int br_vlan_info(struct net_bridge *br, struct net_bridge_port *p, That looks fine. Acked-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 12:22:35 +0300 > Static checkers complain that we should maybe set "ret" before we do the > "goto out;". They interpret the NULL return from br_port_get_rtnl() as > a failure and forgetting to set the error code is a common bug in this > situation. > > The code is confusing but it's actually correct. We are returning zero > deliberately. Let's re-write it a bit to be more clear. > > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> Applied to net-next, thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/net/bridge/br_netlink.c b/net/bridge/br_netlink.c index 528cf27..3875ea51 100644 --- a/net/bridge/br_netlink.c +++ b/net/bridge/br_netlink.c @@ -311,17 +311,14 @@ errout: int br_getlink(struct sk_buff *skb, u32 pid, u32 seq, struct net_device *dev, u32 filter_mask) { - int err = 0; struct net_bridge_port *port = br_port_get_rtnl(dev); if (!port && !(filter_mask & RTEXT_FILTER_BRVLAN) && !(filter_mask & RTEXT_FILTER_BRVLAN_COMPRESSED)) - goto out; + return 0; - err = br_fill_ifinfo(skb, port, pid, seq, RTM_NEWLINK, NLM_F_MULTI, - filter_mask, dev); -out: - return err; + return br_fill_ifinfo(skb, port, pid, seq, RTM_NEWLINK, NLM_F_MULTI, + filter_mask, dev); } static int br_vlan_info(struct net_bridge *br, struct net_bridge_port *p,
Static checkers complain that we should maybe set "ret" before we do the "goto out;". They interpret the NULL return from br_port_get_rtnl() as a failure and forgetting to set the error code is a common bug in this situation. The code is confusing but it's actually correct. We are returning zero deliberately. Let's re-write it a bit to be more clear. Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html