lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Oct]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] init: make init failures more explicit
From
On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Michael Opdenacker
<michael.opdenacker@free-electrons.com> wrote:
> + if (ret && ret != -ENOENT) {
> + pr_err("Starting init: %s exists but couldn't execute it\n",

I think it makes sense to also print the value of ret here.
Apart from your -ENOEXEC case, peeking a bit around, it can be also be
-EINVAL, -ENOMEM (debug binary too big for small embedded system?),
-EACCES, -E2BIG, ...

> + init_filename);
> + }

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-10-18 11:41    [W:0.056 / U:0.076 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site