MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1244124749.22576.71.camel@johannes.local>
References: <1244021629-18409-4-git-send-email-dbaryshkov@gmail.com>
	 <1244021629-18409-5-git-send-email-dbaryshkov@gmail.com>
	 <1244021964.10665.5.camel@johannes.local>
	 <20090603.030911.162861804.davem@davemloft.net>
	 <20090603105256.GB20508@doriath.ww600.siemens.net>
	 <1244027110.1693.9.camel@johannes.local>
	 <20090603122744.GC20508@doriath.ww600.siemens.net>
	 <1244124749.22576.71.camel@johannes.local>
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 18:51:58 +0400
Message-ID: <bc64b4640906040751i3c64c317i4eedb7d53307092a@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] net: add NL802154 interface for configuration of
	802.15.4 devices
From: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov@gmail.com>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
	sfr@canb.auug.org.au, slapin@ossfans.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org

2009/6/4 Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>:
> On Wed, 2009-06-03 at 16:27 +0400, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
>
>> > > +static int ieee802154_nl_put_failure(struct sk_buff *msg)
>> > > +{
>> > > + void *hdr = genlmsg_data(NLMSG_DATA(msg->data)); /* XXX: nlh is right at the start of msg */
>> > > + genlmsg_cancel(msg, hdr);
>> > > + nlmsg_free(msg);
>> > > + return -ENOBUFS;
>> > > +}
>> >
>> > This seems weird.
>>
>> Why?
>
> Because it's strange to cancel then free?

>From looking at the other code, the usual pattern for netlink is
(please, correct me if I'm wrong):

int fill (....)
{
   genlmsg_put();
   NLA_PUT(...)
   NLA_PUT(...)
   return genlmsg_end();

nla_put_failure:
   genlmsg_cancel();
   return -EMSGSIZE;
}

int cmd(...)
{
    int rc;
    nlmsg_new();

    rc = fill();
    if (rc < 0)
        goto out;

    genlmsg_unicast();

out:
    nlmsg_free();
    return -ENOBUFS;
}

This is equivalent to our code:

sk_buff *new()
{
   msg = nlmsg_new();
   genlmsg_put();
   return msg;
}

int finish()
{
    genlmsg_end();
    return genlmsg_unicast(); /*multicast in our case, but doesn't matter */
}

int cancel()
{
   genlmsg_cancel();
   nlmsg_free();
   return -ENOBUFS;
}

int cmd()
{
  msg = new();
  NLA_PUT()
  NLA_PUT();
  return finish();
nla_put_failure:
  return cancel();
}

>> > > +static int ieee802154_associate_req(struct sk_buff *skb, struct genl_info *info)
>> > > +{
>> > > + struct net_device *dev;
>> > > + struct ieee802154_addr addr;
>> > > + int ret = -EINVAL;
>> > > +
>> > > + if (!info->attrs[IEEE802154_ATTR_CHANNEL]
>> > > + ?|| !info->attrs[IEEE802154_ATTR_COORD_PAN_ID]
>> > > + ?|| (!info->attrs[IEEE802154_ATTR_COORD_HW_ADDR] && !info->attrs[IEEE802154_ATTR_COORD_SHORT_ADDR])
>> > > + ?|| !info->attrs[IEEE802154_ATTR_CAPABILITY])
>> > > + ? ? ? ? return -EINVAL;
>> >
>> > That's some odd coding style.
>>
>> Could you please elaborate this? What seems odd to you?
>
> if (X
> ? ?&& Y)
>
> vs
>
> if (X &&
> ? ?Y)
>
> where the latter is used for all other sources files in the kernel. Try
> applying that to _all_ your patches while you rework the sources to fit
> into 80 columns.

Fine, I'll apply the latter pattern and try to reformat code to fit to
80 columns.

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry