[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150724062701.GA5525@sudip-PC>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 11:57:01 +0530
From: Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Cc: Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>,
"pebolle@...cali.nl" <pebolle@...cali.nl>,
"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"jasowang@...hat.com" <jasowang@...hat.com>,
"driverdev-devel@...uxdriverproject.org"
<driverdev-devel@...uxdriverproject.org>,
"olaf@...fle.de" <olaf@...fle.de>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"stephen@...workplumber.org" <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
"stefanha@...hat.com" <stefanha@...hat.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"apw@...onical.com" <apw@...onical.com>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 3/7] Drivers: hv: vmbus: add APIs to send/recv hvsock
packet and get the r/w-ability
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 01:24:50PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 01:10:57PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > In this specific case, writing it as "if (ret != 0)" caused the bug. If
> > we had written it as "if (ret) return ret;" then there are no zeroes so
> > wouldn't have been any temptation to return the zero instead of the ret.
>
> I did a search to see if returning the zero instead of the ret was a
> common mistake and it seems like it might be. I did:
>
> grep 'if (ret != 0)' drivers/ -r -A1 -n | grep "return 0;" | perl -ne 's/.c-(\d+)-/.c:$1/; print'
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_display.c:111 return 0;
This is also ok, the function is supposed to return ret or-ed with the
relevant flags based on the scan position. It is considered error if 0
is returned (without any flag).
regards
sudip
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists