From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Guillaume Nault <g.nault@alphalink.fr>
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2016 21:22:22 +0000
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 6/6] ppp: add rtnetlink device creation support
Message-Id: <20160405212222.GD1305@alphalink.fr>
List-Id: <linux-ppp.vger.kernel.org>
References: <cover.1459807527.git.g.nault@alphalink.fr>
 <dc5fd88775581dba073d0051bbfb4c2c9c5c2d23.1459807527.git.g.nault@alphalink.fr>
 <5703F356.6050107@bfs.de>
In-Reply-To: <5703F356.6050107@bfs.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: walter harms <wharms@bfs.de>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-ppp@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>

On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 07:18:14PM +0200, walter harms wrote:
> 
> 
> Am 05.04.2016 02:56, schrieb Guillaume Nault:
> > @@ -1043,12 +1048,39 @@ static int ppp_dev_configure(struct net *src_net, struct net_device *dev,
> >  			     const struct ppp_config *conf)
> >  {
> >  	struct ppp *ppp = netdev_priv(dev);
> > +	struct file *file;
> >  	int indx;
> > +	int err;
> > +
> > +	if (conf->fd < 0) {
> > +		file = conf->file;
> > +		if (!file) {
> > +			err = -EBADF;
> > +			goto out;
> 
> why not just return -EBADF;
> 
> > +		}
> > +	} else {
> > +		file = fget(conf->fd);
> > +		if (!file) {
> > +			err = -EBADF;
> > +			goto out;
> 	
> why not just return -EBADF;
> 
Just because the 'out' label is declared anyway and because this
centralises the return point. But I agree returning -EBADF directly
could be more readable. I don't have strong opinion.

From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Guillaume Nault <g.nault@alphalink.fr>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 6/6] ppp: add rtnetlink device creation support
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2016 23:22:22 +0200
Message-ID: <20160405212222.GD1305@alphalink.fr>
References: <cover.1459807527.git.g.nault@alphalink.fr>
 <dc5fd88775581dba073d0051bbfb4c2c9c5c2d23.1459807527.git.g.nault@alphalink.fr>
 <5703F356.6050107@bfs.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-ppp@vger.kernel.org,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: walter harms <wharms@bfs.de>
Return-path: <linux-ppp-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5703F356.6050107@bfs.de>
Sender: linux-ppp-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 07:18:14PM +0200, walter harms wrote:
> 
> 
> Am 05.04.2016 02:56, schrieb Guillaume Nault:
> > @@ -1043,12 +1048,39 @@ static int ppp_dev_configure(struct net *src_net, struct net_device *dev,
> >  			     const struct ppp_config *conf)
> >  {
> >  	struct ppp *ppp = netdev_priv(dev);
> > +	struct file *file;
> >  	int indx;
> > +	int err;
> > +
> > +	if (conf->fd < 0) {
> > +		file = conf->file;
> > +		if (!file) {
> > +			err = -EBADF;
> > +			goto out;
> 
> why not just return -EBADF;
> 
> > +		}
> > +	} else {
> > +		file = fget(conf->fd);
> > +		if (!file) {
> > +			err = -EBADF;
> > +			goto out;
> 	
> why not just return -EBADF;
> 
Just because the 'out' label is declared anyway and because this
centralises the return point. But I agree returning -EBADF directly
could be more readable. I don't have strong opinion.