linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] [JFFS2] jffs2_start_garbage_collect

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20090624200029.d875c48e.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Wed, 24 Jun 2009 20:00:29 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc:	Gerard Lledo <gerard.lledo@...il.com>,
	linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [JFFS2] jffs2_start_garbage_collect_thread() return
 value cleanup

On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 11:09:01 +0100 David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 2009-06-02 at 15:11 +0300, Gerard Lledo wrote:
> > There is no user of this return value in the kernel.  Change it to return void
> > instead.
> 
> NAK. I hate this type of patch.
> 
> A function _should_ return an error value indicating success or failure,
> if there's _any_ chance that it (or a future rewrite of it) may fail.
> 
> It's up to the _callers_ to act on that result, or not, as they see fit.

True.

> Andrew, may I suggest that you look for such justification in future
> patches of this type?

eh, I sometimes don't even look at them.  I just save them up in case of
maintainer fumblage.

I might retain this one as a "jffs2 fails to check
jffs2_start_garbage_collect_thread() return value" bug report :)
--
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/