[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20130924164646.c42172bb0f86e5eec0c16fe5@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 16:46:46 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Wei Yongjun <weiyj.lk@...il.com>
Cc: keescook@...omium.org, yongjun_wei@...ndmicro.com.cn,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2o: add missing destroy_workqueue() on error in
i2o_driver_register()
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 17:56:56 +0800 Wei Yongjun <weiyj.lk@...il.com> wrote:
> From: Wei Yongjun <yongjun_wei@...ndmicro.com.cn>
>
> Add the missing destroy_workqueue() before return from
> i2o_driver_register() in the error handling case.
yup.
> --- a/drivers/message/i2o/driver.c
> +++ b/drivers/message/i2o/driver.c
> @@ -105,7 +105,8 @@ int i2o_driver_register(struct i2o_driver *drv)
> osm_err("too many drivers registered, increase "
> "max_drivers\n");
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&i2o_drivers_lock, flags);
> - return -EFAULT;
> + rc = -EFAULT;
Why on earth does this function return -EFAULT (twice)? Imagine the poor
user's confusion if that code gets propagated back to his application
or shell.
--
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