Re: v2 [PATCH net-next 5/7] ipv4: Check return of dev_set_allmulti

[Wang Chen <wangchen@cn.fujitsu.com>]

Patrick McHardy said the following on 2008-7-1 17:40:
> Wang Chen wrote:
>> allmulti might overflow.
>> Commit: "netdevice: Fix promiscuity and allmulti overflow" in net-next
>> makes
>> dev_set_promiscuity/allmulti return error number if overflow happened.
>>
>> Here, we check the positive increment for allmulti to get error return.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Wang Chen <wangchen@cn.fujitsu.com>
>> ---
>>  net/ipv4/ipmr.c |    5 ++++-
>>  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/net/ipv4/ipmr.c b/net/ipv4/ipmr.c
>> index 11700a4..ba0280f 100644
>> --- a/net/ipv4/ipmr.c
>> +++ b/net/ipv4/ipmr.c
>> @@ -398,6 +398,7 @@ static int vif_add(struct vifctl *vifc, int mrtsock)
>>      struct vif_device *v = &vif_table[vifi];
>>      struct net_device *dev;
>>      struct in_device *in_dev;
>> +    int err;
>>  
>>      /* Is vif busy ? */
>>      if (VIF_EXISTS(vifi))
>> @@ -435,7 +436,9 @@ static int vif_add(struct vifctl *vifc, int mrtsock)
>>      if ((in_dev = __in_dev_get_rtnl(dev)) == NULL)
>>          return -EADDRNOTAVAIL;
>>      IPV4_DEVCONF(in_dev->cnf, MC_FORWARDING)++;
>> -    dev_set_allmulti(dev, +1);
>> +    err = dev_set_allmulti(dev, 1);
>> +    if (err)
>> +        return err;
> 
> Missing error handling for VIFF_REGISTER and VIFF_TUNNEL case.
> 

will do.
seems 
>      if ((in_dev = __in_dev_get_rtnl(dev)) == NULL)
should do error handling too.