[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FEBC57C.20302@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 10:46:20 +0800
From: Wen Congyang <wency@...fujitsu.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
CC: lenb@...nel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Yasuaki ISIMATU <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] don't print message if request_resource() failed
At 06/27/2012 12:23 PM, David Rientjes Wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jun 2012, Wen Congyang wrote:
>
>> If register_memory_resource() fails, the caller(add_memory()) will
>> return -EEXIST, and add_memory() returns -EEXIST only when
>> register_memory_resource() fails. The function acpi_memory_enable_device()
>> doesn't treat such erro as a fetal error, and don't want this message.
>> The function that calls add_memory() has printed message if add_memory()
>> failed, so don't print message in register_memory_resource().
>>
>
> That may be true for acpi_memory_enable_device(), but have you checked
> other callers to add_memory()?
>
There are four functions that call add_memory():
1. acpi_memory_enable_device()
2. memory_probe_store()
This caller is the callback of system call write. The user can get the return
value by errno.
3. add_memory_merged()
This caller does not check the return value. I guess add_memory() always
successes in this place.
4. bp_state reserve_additional_memory()
This caller prints message if add_memory() failed.
So I think we can remove this message...
Thanks
Wen Congyang
--
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