Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm/sparse: Clean up the obsolete code comment
From: Michal Hocko
Date: Thu Mar 21 2019 - 06:35:26 EST
On Thu 21-03-19 04:24:35, William Kucharski wrote:
> > On Mar 21, 2019, at 3:21 AM, Baoquan He <bhe@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> It appears as is so often the case that the usage has far outpaced the
> documentation and -EEXIST may be the proper code to return.
> The correct answer here may be to modify the documentation to note the
> additional semantic, though if the usage is solely within the kernel it
> may be sufficient to explain its use in the header comment for the
> routine (in this case sparse_add_one_section()).
Is this really worth? It is a well known problem that errno codes are
far from sufficient to describe error codes we need. Yet we are stuck
with them more or less. I really do not see any point changing this
particular path, nor spend a lot of time whether one inappropriate
code is any better than another one. The code works as intended AFAICS.
I would stick with all good rule of thumb. It works, do not touch it too
I am sorry to be snarky but hasn't this generated way much more email
traffic than it really deserves? A simply and trivial clean up in the
beginning that was it, right?