[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20060927183507.5ef244f3.akpm@osdl.org>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 18:35:07 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
To: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
Cc: linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Illustration of warning explosion silliness
On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 20:58:30 -0400
Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org> wrote:
> The following patch (DO NOT APPLY) illustrates why
> device_for_each_child() should not be marked with __must_check.
>
> The function returns the return value of the actor function, and ceases
> iteration upon error.
>
> However, _every_ case in drivers/scsi has a hardcoded return value,
> illustrating how it is quite valid to not check the return value of this
> function.
>
What does "has a hardcoded return value" mean?
AFICT the problem here is that (for example) (going up the call stack in
the callee->caller direction):
scsi_internal_device_block() returns an error code
but device_block() drops that on the floor
so target_block() drops it on the floor too
so scsi_target_block() drops it on the floor too
It's a small matter of (correct kernel) programming to correctly propagate
the scsi_internal_device_block() error code all the way back out of
scsi_target_block().
It all looks rather sloppy?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists