[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJd=RBCWCinPwnqeXwm5P0zecbe3o1T+10xNSttfvYMN0feu0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 20:22:28 +0800
From: Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: greg@...ah.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mark.a.allyn@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] sep: Add interfaces for the new functions
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 21:53:50 +0800
> Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Sorry don't see what you are pointing out. It might help if you posted
> just the small bit in question ?
Hello Alan
> if (1 == test_bit(SEP_LEGACY_SENDMSG_DONE_OFFSET,
> &call_status->status)) {
> - dev_dbg(&sep->pdev->dev,
> - "[PID%d] dcb preparation needed before send msg\n",
> + dev_warn(&sep->pdev->dev,
> + "[PID%d] dcb prep needed before send msg\n",
> current->pid);
> error = -EPROTO;
Here error is assigned with -EPROTO,
> goto end_function;
> }
>
> if (!arg) {
> - dev_dbg(&sep->pdev->dev,
> - "[PID%d] dcb prep null arg\n", current->pid);
> - error = -EINVAL;
> + dev_warn(&sep->pdev->dev,
> + "[PID%d] dcb null arg\n", current->pid);
> + error = EINVAL;
why is EINVAL used then instead of -EINVAL?
Is this error case anything special from the above?
I guess it is typo.
Good weekend
Hillf
> goto end_function;
> }
Powered by blists - more mailing lists