[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1376975340.2016.42.camel@joe-AO722>
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 22:09:00 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Chen Gang <gang.chen@...anux.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl" <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, riel@...hat.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] kernel/sysctl.c: check return value after call
proc_put_char() in __do_proc_doulongvec_minmax()
On Tue, 2013-08-20 at 11:38 +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
> Need check the return value of proc_put_char(), just like another have
> done in __do_proc_doulongvec_minmax().
>
> Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <gang.chen@...anux.com>
> ---
> kernel/sysctl.c | 5 ++++-
> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sysctl.c b/kernel/sysctl.c
> index 7822cd8..ee00986 100644
> --- a/kernel/sysctl.c
> +++ b/kernel/sysctl.c
> @@ -2214,8 +2214,11 @@ static int __do_proc_doulongvec_minmax(void *data, struct ctl_table *table, int
> *i = val;
> } else {
> val = convdiv * (*i) / convmul;
> - if (!first)
> + if (!first) {
> err = proc_put_char(&buffer, &left, '\t');
> + if (err)
> + goto free;
> + }
I think you should use break and convert it in
to goto free in patch 2/2.
Otherwise, this style looks out of place.
> err = proc_put_long(&buffer, &left, val, false);
> if (err)
> break;
--
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