lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Oct]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] add_partition silently ignored errors
On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 10:09:34AM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 09:07:42 +0100,
> Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > -void add_partition(struct gendisk *disk, int part, sector_t start, sector_t len, int flags)
> > > +int add_partition(struct gendisk *disk, int part, sector_t start, sector_t len, int flags)
> > > {
> > > struct hd_struct *p;
> > >
> > > p = kzalloc(sizeof(*p), GFP_KERNEL);
> > > if (!p)
> > > - return;
> > > + return -1;
> >
> > Why not return the 'correct' error codes, instead of always -1 and
> > making that -EBUSY at the caller? This one should be -ENOMEM.
>
> Oops, you're right. I agree.

Duh. That was dumb of me.

> > IIRC, Al recently vetoed a similar patch. As far as I'm concerned, with
> > the correct return values, the patch then looks fine to me.
>
> We need some kind of check concerning the kobject to avoid mysterious
> errors (especially checking for the failed kobject_add() is needed).
> Whether we want just to inform the user of the failure instead of
> failing the function is another question.

What are you suggesting? I'd love to make the behaviour consistent everywhere
(and am willing to go through things in order to make that happen), but what is
the consistent behaviour that we'd want?

/D
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-10-30 17:59    [W:0.062 / U:0.956 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site