[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090201163234.GC3416@lst.de>
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 17:32:34 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, hpa@...or.com, hch@....de,
serue@...ibm.com, "David C. Hansen" <haveblue@...ibm.com>,
Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sukadev@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] simple_set_mnt() should return void
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 10:30:01PM -0800, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
>
> From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 17:11:13 -0800
> Subject: [RFC][PATCH] simple_set_mnt() should return void
>
> simple_set_mnt() is defined to return int but always returns 0.
> Callers assume simple_set_mnt() never fails and don't properly
> cleanup if it were to _ever_ fail. For instance, get_sb_single()
> and get_sb_nodev() should:
>
> up_write(sb->s_unmount);
> deactivate_super(sb);
>
> if simple_set_mnt() fails.
>
> Since simple_set_mnt() never fails, would be cleaner if it did
> not return anything.
Makes sense to me. Feel free to resend once you did an allmodconfig
or similar build.
--
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