On 11/02/14 17:11, Lew Pitcher wrote: > On Tuesday 11 February 2014 11:02:11 Antonio Quartulli wrote: >> On 11/02/14 16:32, Andrew Lunn wrote: >>> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 01:48:04PM +0100, Antonio Quartulli wrote: >>>> From: Linus Luessing >>>> >>>> Initially developed by Linus during a 6 months trainee study >>>> period in Ascom (Switzerland) AG. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Linus Luessing >>>> Signed-off-by: Marek Lindner >>>> Signed-off-by: Antonio Quartulli >>>> --- >>>> bat_v.c | 18 +++++- >>>> bat_v_elp.c | 204 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- >>>> bat_v_elp.h | 6 ++ >>>> main.h | 2 + >>>> types.h | 53 ++++++++++++++++ >>>> 5 files changed, 281 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/bat_v.c b/bat_v.c >>>> index 7247d7f..bed5e00 100644 >>>> --- a/bat_v.c >>>> +++ b/bat_v.c >>>> @@ -61,5 +61,21 @@ static struct batadv_algo_ops batadv_batman_v > __read_mostly = { >>>> >>>> int __init batadv_v_init(void) >>>> { >>>> - return batadv_algo_register(&batadv_batman_v); >>>> + int ret; >>>> + >>>> + /* batman v echo location protocol packet */ >>>> + ret = batadv_recv_handler_register(BATADV_ELP, >>>> + batadv_v_elp_packet_recv); >>>> + if (ret < 0) >>>> + goto elp_unregister; >>>> + >>>> + ret = batadv_algo_register(&batadv_batman_v); >>>> + >>>> + return ret; >>>> + >>>> +elp_unregister: >>>> + if (ret < 0) >>>> + batadv_recv_handler_unregister(BATADV_ELP); >>> >>> No need to check ret here. If we are here, it has to be < 0. >>> >>> It also seems odd to me you are unregistering the handler when the >>> registration of the handler fails! >>> >>> I suspect the first if (ret < 0) should be followed by a plain return >>> ret; and there should be a second test for the return value of >>> batadv_algo_register() which should goto the label and unregister the >>> handler. >> >> I totally agree with what you said. >> We should jump to elp_unregister if batadv_algo_register() fails. > > Sorry to break in here, but the (ex) professional programmer in me just /has/ > to comment. Everybody is welcome! :) > > Why not just > int __init batadv_v_init(void) > { > - return batadv_algo_register(&batadv_batman_v); > + int ret; > + > + /* batman v echo location protocol packet */ > + ret = batadv_recv_handler_register(BATADV_ELP, > + batadv_v_elp_packet_recv); > + > + if (ret >= 0) > + ret = batadv_algo_register(&batadv_batman_v); > + else > + batadv_recv_handler_unregister(BATADV_ELP); > + > + return ret; > ? > Actually I already fixed it like this: int __init batadv_v_init(void) { - return batadv_algo_register(&batadv_batman_v); + int ret; + + /* batman v echo location protocol packet */ + ret = batadv_recv_handler_register(BATADV_ELP, + batadv_v_elp_packet_recv); + if (ret < 0) + return ret; + + ret = batadv_algo_register(&batadv_batman_v); + if (ret < 0) + batadv_recv_handler_unregister(BATADV_ELP); + + return ret; I think it is easier to read, no? Anyway, this chunk is changed later b patch 7/23 because we add the OGM2 registration. Cheers, -- Antonio Quartulli