Re: [net-next (TAKE 2) 3/4] firewire net, ipv4 arp: Extend hardware address and remove driver-level packet inspection.

[YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>]

(2013年02月10日 23:10), Stefan Richter wrote:
> On Feb 10 YOSHIFUJI Hideaki wrote:
>> @@ -1140,18 +1051,6 @@ static int fwnet_broadcast_start(struct fwnet_device *dev)
>>  	unsigned long offset;
>>  	unsigned u;
>>  
>> -	if (dev->local_fifo == FWNET_NO_FIFO_ADDR) {
>> -		dev->handler.length = 4096;
>> -		dev->handler.address_callback = fwnet_receive_packet;
>> -		dev->handler.callback_data = dev;
>> -
>> -		retval = fw_core_add_address_handler(&dev->handler,
>> -					&fw_high_memory_region);
>> -		if (retval < 0)
>> -			goto failed_initial;
>> -
>> -		dev->local_fifo = dev->handler.offset;
>> -	}
>>  
>>  	max_receive = 1U << (dev->card->max_receive + 1);
>>  	num_packets = (FWNET_ISO_PAGE_COUNT * PAGE_SIZE) / max_receive;
>> @@ -1234,8 +1133,6 @@ static int fwnet_broadcast_start(struct fwnet_device *dev)
>>  	dev->broadcast_rcv_context = NULL;
>>   failed_context_create:
>>  	fw_core_remove_address_handler(&dev->handler);
>> - failed_initial:
>> -	dev->local_fifo = FWNET_NO_FIFO_ADDR;
>>  
>>  	return retval;
>>  }
> 
> [...]
> 
>> @@ -1546,12 +1421,21 @@ static int fwnet_probe(struct device *_dev)
>>  	dev->broadcast_rcv_context = NULL;
>>  	dev->broadcast_xmt_max_payload = 0;
>>  	dev->broadcast_xmt_datagramlabel = 0;
>> -	dev->local_fifo = FWNET_NO_FIFO_ADDR;
>>  	dev->queued_datagrams = 0;
>>  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&dev->peer_list);
>>  	dev->card = card;
>>  	dev->netdev = net;
>>  
>> +	dev->handler.length = 4096;
>> +	dev->handler.address_callback = fwnet_receive_packet;
>> +	dev->handler.callback_data = dev;
>> +
>> +	ret = fw_core_add_address_handler(&dev->handler, &fw_high_memory_region);
>> +	if (ret < 0)
>> +		goto out;
>> +
>> +	dev->local_fifo = dev->handler.offset;
>> +
>>  	/*
>>  	 * Use the RFC 2734 default 1500 octets or the maximum payload
>>  	 * as initial MTU
> 
> If at all possible, please put changes of this kind into a separate
> patch.
> 
> I get a distinct feeling that the error handling paths in
> fwnet_broadcast_start() and in fwnet_probe() respectively became buggy now.
> This would be easier to verify if shifting this code was done in a separate
> change.

Will do.

--yoshfuji