On Monday 08 December 2008, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Mon, 2008-12-08 at 11:09 -0800, Inaky Perez-Gonzalez wrote: > > > +struct sk_buff *wimax_pipe_msg_alloc(struct wimax_dev *wimax_dev, > > + const void *msg, size_t size, > > + gfp_t gfp_flags) ... > > + might_sleep(); > > + d_fnstart(3, NULL, "(skb %p info %p)\n", skb, info); > > + result = -EPERM; > > + if (security_netlink_recv(skb, CAP_NET_ADMIN)) > > + goto error_perm; > > perms check? Ouch, sorry, right; wonder how I missed this one. > > > + result = -ENODEV; > > + wimax_dev = wimax_dev_get_by_genl_info(info); > > + if (wimax_dev == NULL) > > + goto error_no_wimax_dev; > > > > > > + result = wimax_dev->op_msg_from_user(wimax_dev, msg_buf, msg_len, > > info); +error_noop: > > +error_not_ready: > > + mutex_unlock(&wimax_dev->mutex); > > +error_no_data: > > + dev_put(wimax_dev->net_dev); > > +error_no_wimax_dev: > > +error_perm: > > + d_fnend(3, NULL, "(skb %p info %p) = %d\n", skb, info, result); > > + return result; > > Do you really need all the fnstart/fnend debugging everywhere? Isn't > this easily covered by ftrace nowadays? If you remove that you can very > much simplify the code by using "return -ESOMETHING" instead of jumping > to a label in many of these functions. ftrace: ack -- just let it stabilize a couple of versions (/me thinks e1000 fiasco), then I'll happily get rid of them. -- Inaky
