Re: [PATCH 1/4 V2] ocfs2: use retval instead of status for checking error

[DaeSeok Youn]

Hi,

How is this patch going on?

please check for me.

Thanks.
Daeseok Youn.

2015-03-03 10:38 GMT+09:00 DaeSeok Youn <daeseok.youn@xxxxxxxxx>:
> Hi, all
>
> please, review this patch.
>
> thanks.
>
> regards,
> Daeseok Youn.
>
> 2015-03-02 18:04 GMT+09:00 Richard Weinberger <richard@xxxxxx>:
>> Am 28.02.2015 um 00:48 schrieb Daeseok Youn:
>>> The use of 'status' in __ocfs2_add_entry() can return wrong
>>> status when some functions are failed.
>>>
>>> If ocfs2_journal_access_db() in __ocfs2_add_entry() is failed,
>>> that status is saved to 'status' but return variable is 'retval'
>>> which is saved 'success' status. In case of this,  __ocfs2_add_entry()
>>> is failed but can be returned as 'success'.
>>>
>>> So replace 'status' with 'retval'.
>>
>> As this patch is untested and the issue is theoretical I'm nervous.
>> But the final decision is up to ocfs2 maintainers.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> //richard
--
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/