On 13/10/17 19:00, Roman Mashak wrote:
> Nikolay Aleksandrov <niko...@cumulusnetworks.com> writes:
>
>
> [...]
>
>>>> Why do you want to return the error code here? Walking the code paths
>>>> seems like ENOENT or err from switchdev_port_obj_del are the 2 error
>>>> possibilities.
>>>
>>> For example, if you attempt to delete a non-existing vlan on a port,
>>> the current code succeeds and also sends event :
>>>
>>> rtnetlink_rcv_msg
>>> rtnl_bridge_dellink
>>> br_dellink
>>> br_afspec
>>> br_vlan_info
>>>
>>> int br_dellink(..)
>>> {
>>> ...
>>> err = br_afspec()
>>> if (err == 0)
>>> br_ifinfo_notify(RTM_NEWLINK, p);
>>> }
>>>
>>> This is misleading, so a proper errcode has to be produced.
>>>
>>
>> True, but you also change the expected behaviour because now a user can
>> clear all vlans with one request (1 - 4094), and after the change that
>> will fail with a partial delete if some vlan was missing.
>
> Nikolay, would you like to have a crack at fixing this?
>
Sure, need to finish something and will cook up a patch next week.
Thanks,
Nik
