On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 17:31:42 -0800,
Greg KH <[email protected]> wrote:
> > That makes it easy to get return code checking wrong (especially
> > considering the comment above), and a number of callers do get it wrong.
>
> They do?
For example, fs/ocfs2/super.c only checks for NULL (while neither
selecting nor depending on debugfs), or drivers/block/pktcdvd.c will
only check for IS_ERR(). (Many callers don't seem to care about return
codes at all.)
> The goal here is not to force the caller to care if debugfs is enabled
> or not.
And that's definetly a good thing. (Looking again, not checking for
IS_ERR() isn't as bad as I thought, as the code will continue to do
nothing if called again for a non-existing dentry.)
> > At the very least we should change the misleading comment.
>
> agreed, patches always welcome :)
OK, just changing the comment looks like the most sensible thing to do.
I'll roll up a patch.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
