* David Miller [off-list ref] 2007-03-29 11:43

From: Steven Whitehouse <redacted>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 17:24:10 +0100

quoted

One of the effects of the recent tidy up of the DECnet routing rules
code is that we are no longer able to see the difference between reading
a rule of type FR_ACT_UNREACHABLE returning -ENETUNREACH and simply
running out of rules to look at, which also returns the same thing.

The DECnet code used to return -ESRCH if it ran out of rules in which
case the test in dn_route.c (which resulted in DECnet falling back to
endnode routing in the -ESRCH case) no longer works.

So there seems to be several options to try and solve this: one is to
change the error return for running out of rules in
fib_rules.c:fib_rules_lookup() to something else (but then that has a
knock on effect in the ipv4 code). Another is to add the "not found"
error return as a parameter in the struct fib_rules_ops so that both
protocols can have their preferred error return. Both solutions seem a
bit messy, so I thought I'd ask for some guidance on this before writing
a patch,

I think we should be able to return -ESRCH (a more sensible error
value if you ask me) across the board.

Thomas what do you think?

I agree.