2022-09-29 0:25 GMT+09:00, Tom Talpey <tom@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> On 9/27/2022 5:51 PM, Namjae Jeon wrote:
>> When ipv6 config is disable(CONFIG_IPV6 is not set), ksmbd fallback to
>> create ipv4 socket. User reported that this error message lead to
>> misunderstood some issue. Users have requested not to print this error
>> message that occurs even though there is no problem.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> fs/ksmbd/transport_tcp.c | 3 ++-
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/ksmbd/transport_tcp.c b/fs/ksmbd/transport_tcp.c
>> index 143bba4e4db8..9b35afcdcf0d 100644
>> --- a/fs/ksmbd/transport_tcp.c
>> +++ b/fs/ksmbd/transport_tcp.c
>> @@ -399,7 +399,8 @@ static int create_socket(struct interface *iface)
>>
>> ret = sock_create(PF_INET6, SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_TCP, &ksmbd_socket);
>> if (ret) {
>> - pr_err("Can't create socket for ipv6, try ipv4: %d\n", ret);
>> + if (ret != -EAFNOSUPPORT)
>> + pr_err("Can't create socket for ipv6, try ipv4: %d\n", ret);
>
> Why not just eliminate the splat? The only real error seems to be
> that IPv6 is not configured, which is undoubtedly intentional, and
No, It can return other errors.
> in any case there's nothing to do about it. Suggesting to "try ipv4"
> is kind of pointless, isn't it?
No, It is not bad to give info to users. users can check ksmbd
connection status using netstats.
>
>> ret = sock_create(PF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_TCP,
>> &ksmbd_socket);
>> if (ret) {
>
> The same question applies to IPv4 - socket creation is not something
> that fails in general, and spraying the kernel log isn't particularly
> useful toward fixing it.
I don't understand what you are saying. Since it's not common, it print an error
and give the information to users.
> In any case, the error propagates back up
> to the caller, right? Why wouldn't ksmbd.mountd do the reporting?
Why does ksmbd.mountd appear here?
>
> Tom.
>
