inline. On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 1:44 AM, Guillaume Nault <g.na...@alphalink.fr> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 09:59:03AM +0800, f...@ikuai8.com wrote: >> From: Gao Feng <f...@ikuai8.com> >> >> There are some codes in pppoe and l2tp which use the PPPOX_CONNECTED >> as the value including assignment and condition check. >> They should keep consistent with other codes. >> >> Signed-off-by: Gao Feng <f...@ikuai8.com> >> --- >> v1: Initial Patch >> >> drivers/net/ppp/pppoe.c | 2 +- >> net/l2tp/l2tp_ppp.c | 4 ++-- >> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/net/ppp/pppoe.c b/drivers/net/ppp/pppoe.c >> index 4ddae81..684b773 100644 >> --- a/drivers/net/ppp/pppoe.c >> +++ b/drivers/net/ppp/pppoe.c >> @@ -697,7 +697,7 @@ static int pppoe_connect(struct socket *sock, struct >> sockaddr *uservaddr, >> goto err_put; >> } >> >> - sk->sk_state = PPPOX_CONNECTED; >> + sk->sk_state |= PPPOX_CONNECTED; >> > Using plain assignment makes it clear for the reader that other flags > are unset. I see no reason for changing this.
I get you. So I don't modify the PPPOX_DEAD assignment. But I am afraid if there is some case that the flag PPPOX_BOUND is set before PPPOX_CONNECTED . Then the assignment of "PPPOX_CONNECTED" will clear the PPPOX_BOUND flag. > >> diff --git a/net/l2tp/l2tp_ppp.c b/net/l2tp/l2tp_ppp.c >> index d9560aa..3984385 100644 >> --- a/net/l2tp/l2tp_ppp.c >> +++ b/net/l2tp/l2tp_ppp.c >> @@ -774,7 +774,7 @@ static int pppol2tp_connect(struct socket *sock, struct >> sockaddr *uservaddr, >> out_no_ppp: >> /* This is how we get the session context from the socket. */ >> sk->sk_user_data = session; >> - sk->sk_state = PPPOX_CONNECTED; >> + sk->sk_state |= PPPOX_CONNECTED; >> > Same here. > >> @@ -856,7 +856,7 @@ static int pppol2tp_getname(struct socket *sock, struct >> sockaddr *uaddr, >> error = -ENOTCONN; >> if (sk == NULL) >> goto end; >> - if (sk->sk_state != PPPOX_CONNECTED) >> + if (!(sk->sk_state & PPPOX_CONNECTED)) >> > Looks like it was a bug. This one is worth a separate patch. Ok, I send another patch for this bug. Regards Feng
