[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110324150529.GC8200@swordfish.minsk.epam.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:05:29 +0200
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: check device_create_file() return code in
usb_create_sysfs_intf_files()
On (03/24/11 10:55), Alan Stern wrote:
> > I just noticed that usb_create_sysfs_intf_files() ignores device_create_file()
> > return code and sets intf->sysfs_files_created to 1, even if sysfs_add_file_mode()
> > returned -ENOMEM (or later sysfs_add_one() returned -EEXIST).
> >
> > Shouldn't we check retval for 0 before setting intf->sysfs_files_created?
>
> No. We want this routine to succeed even if the sysfs files can't be
> created. The interface string attribute is more or less optional.
>
> It would be okay to add a comment explaining this, so that other people
> don't make the same mistake (which has already happened -- you're not
> the first).
>
Thanks. Sorry for the noise then.
Well, in that case, I guess, `int retval;' can be removed, since it's
unused.
Best,
Sergey
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists