Re: [PATCH net-next v10 4/7] bonding: Processing extended arp_ip_target from user space.

[Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>]

On 9/5/25 12:18 AM, David Wilder wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_options.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_options.c
> index cf4cb301a738..61334633403d 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_options.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_options.c
> @@ -31,8 +31,8 @@ static int bond_option_use_carrier_set(struct bonding *bond,
>  				       const struct bond_opt_value *newval);
>  static int bond_option_arp_interval_set(struct bonding *bond,
>  					const struct bond_opt_value *newval);
> -static int bond_option_arp_ip_target_add(struct bonding *bond, __be32 target);
> -static int bond_option_arp_ip_target_rem(struct bonding *bond, __be32 target);
> +static int bond_option_arp_ip_target_add(struct bonding *bond, struct bond_arp_target target);
> +static int bond_option_arp_ip_target_rem(struct bonding *bond, struct bond_arp_target target);

Above and elsewhere:

'struct bond_arp_target' -> 'const struct bond_arp_target *'

Side note, I replied by mistake to older revision of this series:

https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/dbc791a9-7b87-42a8-abba-fa63e5812008@redhat.com/T/#u
https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/8c0b5b0a-60ee-4ed4-b439-11d5c106ac6e@redhat.com/T/#u
https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/add4dcf4-b3c2-40dd-bc2f-de80619e7c6f@redhat.com/T/#u

but the comments there apply to v10.

> @@ -1214,30 +1216,77 @@ static int bond_option_arp_ip_target_rem(struct bonding *bond, __be32 target)
>  			targets_rx[i] = targets_rx[i+1];
>  		targets_rx[i] = 0;
>  	}
> -	for (i = ind; (i < BOND_MAX_ARP_TARGETS - 1) && targets[i + 1].target_ip; i++)
> -		targets[i] = targets[i+1];
> +
> +	bond_free_vlan_tag(&targets[ind]);
> +
> +	for (i = ind; (i < BOND_MAX_ARP_TARGETS - 1) && targets[i + 1].target_ip; i++) {
> +		targets[i].target_ip = targets[i + 1].target_ip;
> +		targets[i].tags = targets[i + 1].tags;
> +		targets[i].flags = targets[i + 1].flags;
> +	}
>  	targets[i].target_ip = 0;
> +	targets[i].flags = 0;
> +	targets[i].tags = NULL;

The above chunk of code is repeated elsewhere. Possibly factoring out
the initialization in an helper could be useful.

/P