Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Message-ID: <d5e1aada694465fd62f57695e264259815e60746.camel@perches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/2] bonding: combine netlink and console
 error messages
From:   Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To:     Jonathan Toppins <jtoppins@redhat.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        leon@kernel.org
Cc:     Jay Vosburgh <j.vosburgh@gmail.com>,
        Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@gmail.com>,
        Andy Gospodarek <andy@greyhouse.net>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Date:   Tue, 10 Aug 2021 20:27:01 -0700
In-Reply-To: <e6b78ce8f5904a5411a809cf4205d745f8af98cb.1628650079.git.jtoppins@redhat.com>
References: <cover.1628650079.git.jtoppins@redhat.com>
         <e6b78ce8f5904a5411a809cf4205d745f8af98cb.1628650079.git.jtoppins@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.40.0-1 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 2021-08-10 at 22:53 -0400, Jonathan Toppins wrote:
> There seems to be no reason to have different error messages between
> netlink and printk. It also cleans up the function slightly.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Toppins <jtoppins@redhat.com>
> ---
> 
> Notes:
> ????v2:
> ?????- changed the printks to reduce object code slightly
> ?????- emit a single error message based on if netlink or sysfs is
> ???????attempting to enslave
> ?????- rebase on top of net-next/master and convert additional
> ???????instances added by XDP additions
> 
> ?drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c | 69 ++++++++++++++++++---------------
> ?1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
[]
> @@ -1725,6 +1725,20 @@ void bond_lower_state_changed(struct slave *slave)
> ?	netdev_lower_state_changed(slave->dev, &info);
> ?}
> 
> +#define BOND_NL_ERR(bond_dev, extack, errmsg) do {		\
> +	if (extack)						\
> +		NL_SET_ERR_MSG(extack, errmsg);			\
> +	else							\
> +		netdev_err(bond_dev, "Error: %s\n", errmsg);	\
> +} while (0)
> +
> +#define SLAVE_NL_ERR(bond_dev, slave_dev, extack, errmsg) do {		\
> +	if (extack)							\
> +		NL_SET_ERR_MSG(extack, errmsg);				\
> +	else								\
> +		slave_err(bond_dev, slave_dev, "Error: %s\n", errmsg);	\
> +} while (0)

Ideally both of these would be static functions and not macros.