Re: [PATCH 1/1] btrfs: volumes: fix improper return value

[Omar Sandoval]

On Sat, Dec 03, 2016 at 07:01:45PM +0800, Pan Bian wrote:
> Variable ret takes the errno on failures. However, it directly returns 0.
> It may be better to return "ret".
> 
> Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=188741
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pan Bian <bianpan2016@xxxxxxx>
> ---
>  fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
> index 71a60cc..32fd903 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
> @@ -4222,7 +4222,7 @@ static int btrfs_uuid_scan_kthread(void *data)
>  	else
>  		set_bit(BTRFS_FS_UPDATE_UUID_TREE_GEN, &fs_info->flags);
>  	up(&fs_info->uuid_tree_rescan_sem);
> -	return 0;
> +	return ret;

This is a kthread, no one checks the return value. We already let the
user know if it fails:

	btrfs_warn(fs_info, "btrfs_uuid_scan_kthread failed %d", ret);

>  }
>  
>  /*
> -- 
> 1.9.1
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html