On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 9:41 AM Davide Caratti <dcara...@redhat.com> wrote:
> +int tcf_action_check_ctrlact(int action, struct tcf_proto *tp,
> + struct tcf_chain **handle,
Please use a better name than 'handle'. 'handle' is usually used
for a hex numeric ID. Here you just want to save the allocated
tcf_chain to this address.
> + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
> +{
> + int opcode = TC_ACT_EXT_OPCODE(action), ret = -EINVAL;
> + u32 chain_index;
> +
> + if (!opcode)
> + ret = action > TC_ACT_VALUE_MAX ? -EINVAL : 0;
> + else if (opcode <= TC_ACT_EXT_OPCODE_MAX || action == TC_ACT_UNSPEC)
> + ret = 0;
> + if (ret) {
> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG(extack, "invalid control action");
> + goto end;
> + }
> +
> + if (TC_ACT_EXT_CMP(action, TC_ACT_GOTO_CHAIN)) {
> + chain_index = action & TC_ACT_EXT_VAL_MASK;
> + if (!tp) {
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG(extack,
> + "can't use goto_chain with NULL
> proto");
> + goto end;
> + }
> + if (!handle) {
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG(extack,
> + "can't put goto_chain on NULL handle");
> + goto end;
> + }
> + *handle = tcf_chain_get_by_act(tp->chain->block, chain_index);
> + if (!*handle) {
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
Is -ENOMEM okay here? I feel like it should be -ENOSPC or whatever
tcf_chain_get_by_act() says.
Thanks.
