lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Sep]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 7/10] jfs: Fix error handling in write_super_lockfs/unlockfs
From
Date
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 19:57 +0900, Takashi Sato wrote:
> I've changed write_super_lockfs/unlockfs so that they always return
> 0 (success) to keep a current behavior.

Address Christoph's concerns, and you can add my ack. The bits that
change the return code need to be a single patch.

> Signed-off-by: Takashi Sato <t-sato@yk.jp.nec.com>
> Signed-off-by: Masayuki Hamaguchi <m-hamaguchi@ys.jp.nec.com>
Acked-by: Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>


> -static void jfs_write_super_lockfs(struct super_block *sb)
> +static int jfs_write_super_lockfs(struct super_block *sb)
> {
> struct jfs_sb_info *sbi = JFS_SBI(sb);
> struct jfs_log *log = sbi->log;
> @@ -553,9 +553,10 @@ static void jfs_write_super_lockfs(struc
> lmLogShutdown(log);
> updateSuper(sb, FM_CLEAN);
> }
> + return 0;

Alright. Nothing should fail here, and if it does, we're screwed
anyway.

> -static void jfs_unlockfs(struct super_block *sb)
> +static int jfs_unlockfs(struct super_block *sb)
> {
> struct jfs_sb_info *sbi = JFS_SBI(sb);
> struct jfs_log *log = sbi->log;
> @@ -568,6 +569,7 @@ static void jfs_unlockfs(struct super_bl
> else
> txResume(sb);
> }
> + return 0;

jfs_unlockfs() could return non-zero in the case where lmLogInit()
fails. I'm not sure what good that does though. There isn't much the
caller can do when an unfreeze fails.

Shaggy
--
David Kleikamp
IBM Linux Technology Center



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-09-24 16:09    [W:0.035 / U:0.300 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site