From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jiri Benc Subject: Re: [RFC 4/5] netlink: prepare validate extack setting for recursion Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 11:44:17 +0200 Message-ID: <20180919114417.63536b88@redhat.com> References: <20180918131212.20266-1-johannes@sipsolutions.net> <20180918131212.20266-4-johannes@sipsolutions.net> <20180919033733.GK4590@localhost.localdomain> <1537349117.10305.25.camel@sipsolutions.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Johannes Berg Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:55100 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727605AbeISPV0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Sep 2018 11:21:26 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1537349117.10305.25.camel@sipsolutions.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 11:25:17 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > Now, with this patch, all I'm doing is changing the internal behaviour > of nla_parse/nla_validate - externally, it still overwrites any existing > message if an error occurs, but internally it keeps the inner-most > error. Ah, okay, that answers my question about putting the flag into the ext_ack struct, too. It may still be worthwhile to have a mechanism for prioritizing certain extack messages over another ones but it's clearly out of scope of this patchset. The patchset looks good to me. Just include the description you just wrote in the commit message :-) Thanks! Jiri