Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 7 Dec 2015 12:46:37 +0530 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Staging: speakup: kobjects: Return the error type to caller | From | Saurabh Sengar <> |
| |
On 7 December 2015 at 12:18, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 08:12:33PM +0530, Saurabh Sengar wrote: >> Inorder to notify the user that value is not successfuly set in sys >> entry, error should be returned from store function instead of count >> >> Signed-off-by: Saurabh Sengar <saurabh.truth@gmail.com> >> --- >> drivers/staging/speakup/kobjects.c | 5 ++++- >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/staging/speakup/kobjects.c b/drivers/staging/speakup/kobjects.c >> index fdfeb42..b3a83fb 100644 >> --- a/drivers/staging/speakup/kobjects.c >> +++ b/drivers/staging/speakup/kobjects.c >> @@ -640,7 +640,8 @@ ssize_t spk_var_store(struct kobject *kobj, struct kobj_attribute *attr, >> len = E_INC; >> else >> len = E_SET; >> - if (kstrtol(cp, 10, &value) == 0) >> + ret = kstrtol(cp, 10, &value); >> + if (!ret) >> ret = spk_set_num_var(value, param, len); > > Both kstrtol() and spk_set_num_var() return -ERANGE. The next lines > expect that if we got -ERANGE, then it came from spk_set_num_var() so > they print a wrong message.
Yes I understand this. And in case we got -ERANGE from spk_set_num_var, it is printing the error message. I have tested this too by passing the out of range values to few parameters.
> >> else >> pr_warn("overflow or parsing error has occurred"); >> @@ -688,6 +689,8 @@ ssize_t spk_var_store(struct kobject *kobj, struct kobj_attribute *attr, >> >> if (ret == -ERESTART) >> pr_info("%s reset to default value\n", param->name); > > Is this really true? Sorry, I am not sure here what you mean here. I have not implemented it. > > This function is so weird and broken. Please look at it some more and > fix it harder with a mallet. You mean I broke it ? I don't think so, I have tested the functionality before submitting the patch. If you mean that this function already not in good shape, I understand and agree with you. > > regards, > dan carpenter >
| |