[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8d38547f-a086-438a-5b2a-4d11929530ec@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Fri, 12 May 2017 09:32:39 +0200
From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, devel@...uxdriverproject.org
Subject: Re: vmbus: Delete an error message for a failed memory allocation in
vmbus_device_create()
>> Just because an automated tool says that this needs to change does not
>> mean it has to.
>
> Checkpatch.pl is correct here. This message is useless. It's during
> init so it's unlikely to fail ever. In current kernels small kmallocs
> are quaranteed to succeed so it can't actually fail currently. The
> stack trace is more useful than this message because it tells you a lot
> about what memory is free and the whole call tree.
>
> The error message is dead useless code.
Would you like to clarify corresponding software evolution any more?
Is there a need for better documentation of the involved programming interfaces?
> This patch is not going to be merged because Markus doesn't listen to
> feedback and he's blocked but otherwise it's an OK patch.
Does this information contain a contradiction?
Will patches be picked up also from contributors who got a special
development reputation anyhow?
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists