Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-16433-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2024 09:23:44 +0000
From: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
To: Chris Lew <quic_clew@quicinc.com>
Cc: Sarannya S <quic_sarannya@quicinc.com>, quic_bjorande@quicinc.com,
	andersson@kernel.org, mathieu.poirier@linaro.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org,
	Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	"open list:NETWORKING [GENERAL]" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V1] net: qrtr: ns: Ignore ENODEV failures in ns
Message-ID: <20240104092344.GE31813@kernel.org>
References: <1703153211-3717-1-git-send-email-quic_sarannya@quicinc.com>
 <20231223135333.GA201037@kernel.org>
 <3e017f77-87dd-78e1-321d-90c3e57a68d9@quicinc.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3e017f77-87dd-78e1-321d-90c3e57a68d9@quicinc.com>

On Tue, Dec 26, 2023 at 04:20:03PM -0800, Chris Lew wrote:
> 
> 
> On 12/23/2023 5:56 AM, Simon Horman wrote:
> > [Dropped bjorn.andersson@kernel.org, as the correct address seems
> >   to be andersson@kernel.org, which is already in the CC list.
> >   kernel.org rejected sending this email without that update.]
> > 
> > On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 03:36:50PM +0530, Sarannya S wrote:
> > > From: Chris Lew <quic_clew@quicinc.com>
> > > 
> > > Ignore the ENODEV failures returned by kernel_sendmsg(). These errors
> > > indicate that either the local port has been closed or the remote has
> > > gone down. Neither of these scenarios are fatal and will eventually be
> > > handled through packets that are later queued on the control port.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Chris Lew <quic_clew@quicinc.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Sarannya Sasikumar <quic_sarannya@quicinc.com>
> > > ---
> > >   net/qrtr/ns.c | 11 +++++++----
> > >   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/net/qrtr/ns.c b/net/qrtr/ns.c
> > > index abb0c70..8234339 100644
> > > --- a/net/qrtr/ns.c
> > > +++ b/net/qrtr/ns.c
> > > @@ -157,7 +157,7 @@ static int service_announce_del(struct sockaddr_qrtr *dest,
> > >   	msg.msg_namelen = sizeof(*dest);
> > >   	ret = kernel_sendmsg(qrtr_ns.sock, &msg, &iv, 1, sizeof(pkt));
> > > -	if (ret < 0)
> > > +	if (ret < 0 && ret != -ENODEV)
> > >   		pr_err("failed to announce del service\n");
> > >   	return ret;
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > The caller of service_announce_del() ignores it's return value.
> > So the only action on error is the pr_err() call above, and so
> > with this patch -ENODEV is indeed ignored.
> > 
> > However, I wonder if it would make things clearer to the reader (me?)
> > if the return type of service_announce_del was updated void. Because
> > as things stand -ENODEV may be returned, which implies something might
> > handle that, even though it doe not.
> > 
> > The above notwithstanding, this change looks good to me.
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
> > 
> > ...
> 
> Hi Simon, thanks for the review and suggestion. We weren't sure whether we
> should change the function prototype on these patches on the chance that
> there will be something that listens and handles this in the future. I think
> it's a good idea to change it to void and we can change it back if there is
> such a usecase in the future.

Hi Chris,

yes, I think that would be a good approach.