Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Received-SPF: Pass (protection.outlook.com: domain of nvidia.com designates
 216.228.117.160 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com;
 client-ip=216.228.117.160; helo=mail.nvidia.com; pr=C
References: <20230116144853.2446315-1-daniel.machon@microchip.com>
 <20230116144853.2446315-3-daniel.machon@microchip.com>
 <87cz7cw1g5.fsf@nvidia.com> <874jsow1b6.fsf@nvidia.com>
 <Y8f6dqXGo8ikcQsx@DEN-LT-70577>
User-agent: mu4e 1.6.6; emacs 28.1
From:   Petr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com>
To:     <Daniel.Machon@microchip.com>
CC:     <petrm@nvidia.com>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        <davem@davemloft.net>, <edumazet@google.com>, <kuba@kernel.org>,
        <pabeni@redhat.com>, <Lars.Povlsen@microchip.com>,
        <Steen.Hegelund@microchip.com>, <UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com>,
        <joe@perches.com>, <error27@gmail.com>,
        <Horatiu.Vultur@microchip.com>, <Julia.Lawall@inria.fr>,
        <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>, <maxime.chevallier@bootlin.com>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/6] net: dcb: add new common function for
 set/del of app/rewr entries
Date:   Wed, 18 Jan 2023 16:42:16 +0100
In-Reply-To: <Y8f6dqXGo8ikcQsx@DEN-LT-70577>
Message-ID: <87zgaf9708.fsf@nvidia.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Jan 2023 15:50:48.4700
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 0a558cd2-ffea-465d-ea1b-08daf96bc4de
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalAttributedTenantConnectingIp: TenantId=43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a;Ip=[216.228.117.160];Helo=[mail.nvidia.com]
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: DS1PEPF0000B078.namprd05.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: HybridOnPrem
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BL1PR12MB5287
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,
        DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FORGED_SPF_HELO,
        RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_NONE
        autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on
        lindbergh.monkeyblade.net
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


<Daniel.Machon@microchip.com> writes:

>  > Petr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com> writes:
>> 
>> > Daniel Machon <daniel.machon@microchip.com> writes:
>> >
>> >> In preparation for DCB rewrite. Add a new function for setting and
>> >> deleting both app and rewrite entries. Moving this into a separate
>> >> function reduces duplicate code, as both type of entries requires the
>> >> same set of checks. The function will now iterate through a configurable
>> >> nested attribute (app or rewrite attr), validate each attribute and call
>> >> the appropriate set- or delete function.
>> >>
>> >> Note that this function always checks for nla_len(attr_itr) <
>> >> sizeof(struct dcb_app), which was only done in dcbnl_ieee_set and not in
>> >> dcbnl_ieee_del prior to this patch. This means, that any userspace tool
>> >> that used to shove in data < sizeof(struct dcb_app) would now receive
>> >> -ERANGE.
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Daniel Machon <daniel.machon@microchip.com>
>> >
>> > Reviewed-by: Petr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com>
>> 
>> ... though, now that I found some issues in 3/6, if you would somehow
>> reformat the ?: expression that's now awkwardly split to two unaligned
>> lines, that would placate my OCD:
>> 
>> +               err = dcbnl_app_table_setdel(ieee[DCB_ATTR_IEEE_APP_TABLE],
>> +                                            netdev, ops->ieee_setapp ?:
>> +                                            dcb_ieee_setapp);
>
> Putting the expression on the same line will violate the 80 char limit.
> Does splitting it like that hurt anything - other than your OCD :-P At
> least checkpatch didn't complain.

Yeah, don't worry about it.