From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net/ipv6: Do not allow device only routes via the
 multipath API
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 13:28:45 +0200
Message-ID: <20180713132845.64854ff3@epycfail>
References: <20180712214823.6917-1-dsahern@kernel.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, eric.dumazet@gmail.com,
        David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
To: dsahern@kernel.org
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:54834 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1728035AbeGMLnI (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 13 Jul 2018 07:43:08 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20180712214823.6917-1-dsahern@kernel.org>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:48:23 -0700
dsahern@kernel.org wrote:

> @@ -4388,6 +4388,13 @@ static int ip6_route_multipath_add(struct fib6_config *cfg,
>  			rt = NULL;
>  			goto cleanup;
>  		}
> +		if (!rt6_qualify_for_ecmp(rt)) {
> +			err = EINVAL;

Shouldn't this be -EINVAL, just for consistency? E.g. we might return a
-ENOMEM from ip6_route_info_append(), etc.

-- 
Stefano