[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1207091901210.25143@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 19:02:39 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: Wanpeng Li <liwp.linux@...il.com>
cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
William Irwin <wli@...omorphy.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/hugetlb: fix error code in hugetlbfs_alloc_inode
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> diff --git a/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c b/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> index c4b85d0..79a0f33 100644
> --- a/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> @@ -696,7 +696,7 @@ static struct inode *hugetlbfs_alloc_inode(struct super_block *sb)
> p = kmem_cache_alloc(hugetlbfs_inode_cachep, GFP_KERNEL);
> if (unlikely(!p)) {
> hugetlbfs_inc_free_inodes(sbinfo);
> - return NULL;
> + return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> }
> return &p->vfs_inode;
> }
So now you've removed Gavin Shan who already told you that it was correct
as written and propose yet another bogus patch which will break. This
isn't professional.
alloc_inode() tests for a NULL return value, not for PTR_ERR(), so you
would be introducing a bug if this patch were merged. It's completely
correct the way it's written.
--
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