Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next 09/10] bonding: fill IPsec state validation failure reason

From: Jay Vosburgh <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2023 15:01:32 -0800

Leon Romanovsky <[email-masked]> wrote:

>From: Leon Romanovsky <[email-masked]>
>
>Rely on extack to return failure reason.
>
>Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <[email-masked]>
>Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <[email-masked]>
>---
> drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>index 686b2a6fd674..00646aa315c3 100644
>--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>@@ -444,7 +444,7 @@ static int bond_ipsec_add_sa(struct xfrm_state *xs,
> 	if (!slave->dev->xfrmdev_ops ||
> 	    !slave->dev->xfrmdev_ops->xdo_dev_state_add ||
> 	    netif_is_bond_master(slave->dev)) {
>-		slave_warn(bond_dev, slave->dev, "Slave does not support ipsec offload\n");
>+		NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "Slave does not support ipsec offload");
> 		rcu_read_unlock();
> 		return -EINVAL;
> 	}

	Why only this one, and not include the other similar
slave_warn() calls in the bond_ipsec_* functions?  That would seem to
make some failures show up in dmesg, and others returned to the caller
via extack.

	-J

---
	-Jay Vosburgh, [email-masked]