From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15B95C433FF for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2019 17:50:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA4C9217D7 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2019 17:50:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=netronome-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@netronome-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="VaP4MKnk" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732786AbfHHRuV (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Aug 2019 13:50:21 -0400 Received: from mail-qk1-f195.google.com ([209.85.222.195]:34580 "EHLO mail-qk1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729925AbfHHRuU (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Aug 2019 13:50:20 -0400 Received: by mail-qk1-f195.google.com with SMTP id p1so2106401qkm.1 for ; Thu, 08 Aug 2019 10:50:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=netronome-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references :organization:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=oKFwrL4RPnBdhgXX2NvVWtcFE2czxOUkdtY3yXFr7eg=; b=VaP4MKnk+DypFhEnNMAymSXYx+CWgVGcTZDlYu4PQ8b6pgD9bNgtz7taQAhrK8KqW+ W+hmYnlOVcFweLyyRy6HrVKdCElmOzLBCQIHzKz1bKB1jLVY8tjfuzueTMqZfu5jSTer BBKPLdWumEKT+pmnCzEhr45g1MWpzGUesJzUJSlmwl9s5I44fQVbuMxHzmd3AHD5Rgv5 WvbebqQwsetV9o4oOAQrbyk3Z2UsWoF0wB95cWbFe4thQfrwEuPq3d+7bCotdk30zuL9 FzLdEHObnnMzBlahdz3R37d2Pqsk1kFJnHFjHKNb9aPABzsHADIrXySdvxmvfC8a40OY TwOQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :references:organization:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=oKFwrL4RPnBdhgXX2NvVWtcFE2czxOUkdtY3yXFr7eg=; b=N8kC93CdaFugXnELdkLEfyA2xJBTtggCeLFRQ7TTXauMeytTbd8i5cT5B7r41NtGQf lBbtw20XZgOuZnYFmjwC8Q+KhcnnEhCRZUqzQSbaNlQuqBgH7aZEtcfc/r7SFtDAobIC SkAMh2F8bUBWfvdp5UG7jAhA40aDKSuqHDpF6onjqIRzFRr7pbM7dL8T//pujkoxHS5A LKB4A0fPeT5Tjhzwyg58mH1raMADyvOqOYfXKwKDtXPJSdX4lonMSY4+h3IlN9xohIfI EexTkpizyA0PQC9myt6cgRdQbRHmwhY4XjrpMUd/WtkYkIhFFjIipAge2TonaV3Sf6Cf PwJQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXg3vj/sQQj+2HHahe6PlrpQZHLGAGwGolofs9zgmKcnkOQlcdZ CoH3hqdWj2pi9EEXVtibczZabw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyGe5MD+6NthrTzl1Hid/T1mppKva2Udga73zOV27jgXHyohSgMvj7vtb4PXFlCBe1ZYmmFDg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:746:: with SMTP id i6mr4013364qki.104.1565286619814; Thu, 08 Aug 2019 10:50:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cakuba.netronome.com ([66.60.152.14]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r205sm46813454qke.115.2019.08.08.10.50.19 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 08 Aug 2019 10:50:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 10:49:48 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: "Daniel T. Lee" Cc: Daniel Borkmann , Alexei Starovoitov , netdev Subject: Re: [v3,1/4] tools: bpftool: add net attach command to attach XDP on interface Message-ID: <20190808104948.7e72dea0@cakuba.netronome.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20190807022509.4214-1-danieltimlee@gmail.com> <20190807022509.4214-2-danieltimlee@gmail.com> <20190807134208.6601fad2@cakuba.netronome.com> Organization: Netronome Systems, Ltd. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 07:15:22 +0900, Daniel T. Lee wrote: > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > + } > > > + > > > + NEXT_ARG(); > > > > nit: the new line should be before NEXT_ARG(), IOV NEXT_ARG() belongs > > to the code which consumed the argument > > > > I'm not sure I'm following. > Are you saying that, at here the newline shouldn't be necessary? I mean this is better: if (!is_prefix(*argv, "bla-bla")) return -EINVAL; NEXT_ARG(); if (!is_prefix(*argv, "bla-bla")) return -EINVAL; NEXT_ARG(); Than this: if (!is_prefix(*argv, "bla-bla")) return -EINVAL; NEXT_ARG(); if (!is_prefix(*argv, "bla-bla")) return -EINVAL; NEXT_ARG(); Because the NEXT_ARG() "belongs" to the code that "consumed" the option. So instead of this: attach_type = parse_attach_type(*argv); if (attach_type == max_net_attach_type) { p_err("invalid net attach/detach type"); return -EINVAL; } NEXT_ARG(); progfd = prog_parse_fd(&argc, &argv); if (progfd < 0) return -EINVAL; This seems more logical to me: attach_type = parse_attach_type(*argv); if (attach_type == max_net_attach_type) { p_err("invalid net attach/detach type"); return -EINVAL; } NEXT_ARG(); progfd = prog_parse_fd(&argc, &argv); if (progfd < 0) return -EINVAL;