Re: [PATCH net-next v5 08/22] ethtool: support for netlink notifications

Jiri Pirko
2019-03-27T09:38:48Z

Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 07:17:20PM CET, mkubecek@suse.cz wrote:
>On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 05:34:00PM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 06:08:18PM CET, mkubecek@suse.cz wrote:
>> >+void ethtool_notify(struct net_device *dev, struct netlink_ext_ack *extack,
>> >+ unsigned int cmd, u32 req_mask, const void *data)
>> >+{
>> >+ if (unlikely(!ethnl_ok))
>>
>> Why do you need this?
>
>If genetlink family registration fails, ethtool_notify() can be still
>called from other code (e.g. the ethtool ioctl interface). In such case,
>better bail out right away than fail somewhere later (probably after
>preparing the message which can't be sent anyway).

Again, haven't seen this in any other gen netlink implementation. Why do
they not need it?

>
>> >+ return;
>> >+ ASSERT_RTNL();
>> >+
>> >+ if (likely(cmd < ARRAY_SIZE(ethnl_notify_handlers) &&
>> >+ ethnl_notify_handlers[cmd]))
>> >+ ethnl_notify_handlers[cmd](dev, extack, cmd, req_mask, data);
>> >+ else
>> >+ WARN_ONCE(1, "notification %u not implemented (dev=%s, req_mask=0x%x)\n",
>> >+ cmd, netdev_name(dev), req_mask);
>> >+}
>> >+EXPORT_SYMBOL(ethtool_notify);
>>
>> Please be consistent with prefixes. Rest of the code (most of it) has
>> prefix "ethnl".
>
>The reason why I used ethtool_ prefix here was that this function is an
>entry point which can be called from anywhere and other code doesn't
>care if we are using netlink or something else. But as any caller would
>need to include <linux/ethtool_netlink.h> anyway to get the constants
>for cmd and req_mask, there is no point hiding the fact. I'll rename it
>to ethnl_notify().

Okay.

>
>> >diff --git a/net/ethtool/netlink.h b/net/ethtool/netlink.h
>> >index b8a6cd3dc3e3..5f2299548915 100644
>> >--- a/net/ethtool/netlink.h
>> >+++ b/net/ethtool/netlink.h
>> >@@ -11,6 +11,8 @@
>> > #define ETHNL_SET_ERRMSG(info, msg) \
>> > do { if (info) GENL_SET_ERR_MSG(info, msg); } while (0)
>> >
>> >+extern u32 ethnl_bcast_seq;
>>
>> Why do you need to have this in header? Second, it is not used by
>> anything. Please don't introduce variables that are not used. Introduce
>> them only in patch where you use it.
>
>It's the same as with ethtool_genl_family. I'll make it static as well
>until it's used in some other file.

Not only static. You should remove it as you are not using it in this
patch at all.

>
>Michal