[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100903093553.GA6821@elte.hu>
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2010 11:35:53 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
H Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Jin Dongming <jin.dongming@...css.fujitsu.com>,
Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>,
Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
lm-sensors <lm-sensors@...sensors.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] therm_throt.c: Fix error handling in
thermal_throttle_add_dev
* Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com> wrote:
> From: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
>
> Warn when sysfs_add_file_to_group fails.
>
> Also add missing curly braces.
>
> Signed-off-by: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/therm_throt.c | 14 ++++++++++----
> 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> + WARN_ON(err);
Hm, we tend to use WARN_ON_ONCE(), to avoid repeat spamming of the
syslog. Also, and perhaps more importantly, WARN_ON() is not a
particularly smart way to handle errors. How do other drivers handle
sysfs registration failures?
Also, that's not the only thing the patch does:
> @@ -211,20 +211,26 @@ static __cpuinit int thermal_throttle_add_dev(struct sys_device *sys_dev)
> - return err;
> + return 0;
How is the ignoring of an error and turning it into a WARN_ON() a fix?
Either it makes no sense to return errors - in which case the whole
add_dev method needs to be fixed in all drivers - or it makes sense, in
which case the behavior here is inconsistent.
At minimum more explanation is needed in the changelog.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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