From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jiri Benc <jbenc@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 4/5] netlink: prepare validate extack setting for
 recursion
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 11:10:48 +0200
Message-ID: <20180919111048.092376b2@redhat.com>
References: <20180918131212.20266-1-johannes@sipsolutions.net>
        <20180918131212.20266-4-johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:50832 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1730605AbeISOrs (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 19 Sep 2018 10:47:48 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20180918131212.20266-4-johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Tue, 18 Sep 2018 15:12:11 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
>  static int validate_nla(const struct nlattr *nla, int maxtype,
>  			const struct nla_policy *policy,
> -			const char **error_msg)
> +			struct netlink_ext_ack *extack, bool *extack_set)

Can't the extack_set be included in the struct netlink_ext_ack? One less
parameter to pass around and the NL_SET_* macros could check this on
their own.

This way, it can be also easily turned to a more complex mechanism,
such as the one Marcelo proposed.

Thanks,

 Jiri