[PATCH review for 3.18 04/14] netfilter: nf_ct_expect: Change __nf_ct_expect_check() return value.

[Levin, Alexander (Sasha Levin)]

From: Jarno Rajahalme <jarno@xxxxxxx>

[ Upstream commit 4b86c459c7bee3acaf92f0e2b4c6ac803eaa1a58 ]

Commit 4dee62b1b9b4 ("netfilter: nf_ct_expect: nf_ct_expect_insert()
returns void") inadvertently changed the successful return value of
nf_ct_expect_related_report() from 0 to 1 due to
__nf_ct_expect_check() returning 1 on success.  Prevent this
regression in the future by changing the return value of
__nf_ct_expect_check() to 0 on success.

Signed-off-by: Jarno Rajahalme <jarno@xxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Joe Stringer <joe@xxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
 net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_expect.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_expect.c b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_expect.c
index 26af45193ab7..7ebdd7ff8ec0 100644
--- a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_expect.c
+++ b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_expect.c
@@ -392,7 +392,7 @@ static inline int __nf_ct_expect_check(struct nf_conntrack_expect *expect)
 	struct net *net = nf_ct_exp_net(expect);
 	struct hlist_node *next;
 	unsigned int h;
-	int ret = 1;
+	int ret = 0;
 
 	if (!master_help) {
 		ret = -ESHUTDOWN;
@@ -442,7 +442,7 @@ int nf_ct_expect_related_report(struct nf_conntrack_expect *expect,
 
 	spin_lock_bh(&nf_conntrack_expect_lock);
 	ret = __nf_ct_expect_check(expect);
-	if (ret <= 0)
+	if (ret < 0)
 		goto out;
 
 	ret = nf_ct_expect_insert(expect);
-- 
2.11.0