From 9d98e98ab37d86323034e7bc342f196b81fa07bc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fabiano Fidêncio <fidencio@redhat.com>
Date: Aug 28 2017 18:41:26 +0000
Subject: HBAC: Document ipa_hbac_rule_info_next()'s behaviour


Let's add a comment on ipa_hbac_rule_info_send() in order to have
cleaner why ret is set to EINVAL when ipa_hbac_rule_info_next() returns
EOK.

Signed-off-by: Fabiano Fidêncio <fidencio@redhat.com>

Reviewed-by: Pavel Březina <pbrezina@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Jakub Hrozek <jhrozek@redhat.com>

---

diff --git a/src/providers/ipa/ipa_hbac_rules.c b/src/providers/ipa/ipa_hbac_rules.c
index b8d4535..cb5a716 100644
--- a/src/providers/ipa/ipa_hbac_rules.c
+++ b/src/providers/ipa/ipa_hbac_rules.c
@@ -166,6 +166,14 @@ ipa_hbac_rule_info_send(TALLOC_CTX *mem_ctx,
 
     ret = ipa_hbac_rule_info_next(req, state);
     if (ret == EOK) {
+        /* ipa_hbac_rule_info_next should always have a search base when called
+         * for the first time.
+         *
+         * For the subsequent iterations, not finding any more search bases is
+         * fine though (thus the function returns EOK).
+         *
+         * As, here, it's the first case happening, let's return EINVAL.
+         */
         ret = EINVAL;
     }