Re: [PATCH 20/25] sysfs: Rename Support multiple superblocks

[Tejun Heo]

Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Welcome.  I will see what I can do with respect to cleaning up
> the names.
> 
> As for the return value of sysfs_get_dentry that is tricky.  In particular
> I have three specific cases the code needs to deal with.
> 
> - We got the dentry.
> - We did not get the dentry because for this super block there never
>   ever will be a dentry.
> - Some kind of error occurred in attempting to get the dentry.
> 
> Not getting a dentry because it is impossible I am currently handling
> with a NULL return.  I can equally use a specific error code to mean
> that as well.  It doesn't much matter.  So I guess the hunk in
> question could read:
> 
>>> +	list_for_each_entry(sb, &sysfs_fs_type.fs_supers, s_instances) {
>>> +		dentry = sysfs_get_dentry(sb, sd);
>>> +		if (dentry == ERR_PTR(-ENOENT))
>>> +			continue;
> 
> As long as we handle that class of error differently I really don't
> care.

Yeah, I think using -ENOENT is better; otherwise, my little head feels
like exploding.  :-)  More importantly, sysfs_get_dentry() seems like it
would deference ERR_PTR() value.  No?

-- 
tejun
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/