Re: [PATCH] nfs-utils: mount: really return from errno test

[Chuck Lever]

What was the presenting problem?  Is there a bugzilla report I can look at?

On Oct 11, 2011, at 5:44 AM, Hamo wrote:

> We should only try next address family if we meet ECONNREFUSED or EHOSTUNREACH
> for v4 or ECONNREFUSED or EOPNOTSUPP or EHOSTUNREACH for v3v2.
> Before, only a break in swich can not make the program out of for loop.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yang Bai <hamo.by@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> utils/mount/stropts.c |    6 ++++--
> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/utils/mount/stropts.c b/utils/mount/stropts.c
> index 314a806..4032bf3 100644
> --- a/utils/mount/stropts.c
> +++ b/utils/mount/stropts.c
> @@ -665,9 +665,10 @@ static int nfs_try_mount_v3v2(struct nfsmount_info *mi)
> 		case EHOSTUNREACH:
> 			continue;
> 		default:
> -			break;
> +			goto out;
> 		}
> 	}
> +out:
> 	return ret;
> }
> 
> @@ -751,9 +752,10 @@ static int nfs_try_mount_v4(struct nfsmount_info *mi)
> 		case EHOSTUNREACH:
> 			continue;
> 		default:
> -			break;
> +			goto out;
> 		}
> 	}
> +out:
> 	return ret;
> }
> 
> -- 
> 1.7.1
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

-- 
Chuck Lever
chuck[dot]lever[at]oracle[dot]com




--
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/