On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 12:11:50AM +0100, Phillip Potter wrote:
> -u8 rtw_set_802_11_add_wep(struct adapter *padapter, struct ndis_802_11_wep *wep)
> +int rtw_set_802_11_add_wep(struct adapter *padapter, struct ndis_802_11_wep *wep)
> {
> int keyid, res;
> struct security_priv *psecuritypriv = &padapter->securitypriv;
> - u8 ret = _SUCCESS;
> + int ret = 0;
>
> keyid = wep->KeyIndex & 0x3fffffff;
>
> if (keyid >= 4) {
> - ret = false;
> + ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> goto exit;
> }
>
> @@ -424,7 +424,7 @@ u8 rtw_set_802_11_add_wep(struct adapter *padapter, struct ndis_802_11_wep *wep)
> res = rtw_set_key(padapter, psecuritypriv, keyid, 1);
>
> if (res == _FAIL)
> - ret = false;
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> exit:
>
> return ret;
No, this isn't right. This now returns 1 on success and negative
error codes on error.
There are a couple anti-patterns here:
1) Do nothing gotos
2) Mixing error paths and success paths.
If you avoid mixing error paths and success paths then you get a pattern
called: "Solid return zero." This is where the end of the function has
a very chunky "return 0;" to mark that it is successful. You want that.
Some people do a "if (ret == 0) return ret;". Nope. "return ret;" is
not chunky.
regards,
dan carpenter
