[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100906141813.GB9632@albatros>
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2010 18:18:13 +0400
From: Kulikov Vasiliy <segooon@...il.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@...com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/14] mm: mempolicy: Check return code of check_range
On Mon, Sep 06, 2010 at 02:02 -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Sep 2010, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
>
> > > From: Vasiliy Kulikov <segooon@...il.com>
> > >
> > > Function check_range may return ERR_PTR(...). Check for it.
> >
> > When happen this issue?
> >
> > afaik, check_range return error when following condition.
> > 1) mm->mmap->vm_start argument is incorrect
> > 2) don't have neigher MPOL_MF_STATS, MPOL_MF_MOVE and MPOL_MF_MOVE_ALL
> >
> > I think both case is not happen in real. Am I overlooking anything?
> >
>
> There's no reason not to check the return value of a function when the
> implementation of either could change at any time. migrate_to_node() is
> certainly not in any fastpath where we can't sacrifice a branch for more
> robust code.
Agreed, if you know that the caller must check input data and must not
check return code, it's better to make this function return void.
--
Vasiliy
--
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