Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1230445 > unrolled thread

[PATCH 2/2] btrfs: reada: Fix returned errno code

Started byLuis de Bethencourt <luisbg@osg.samsung.com>
First post2015-09-22 18:30 +0200
Last post2015-09-23 10:50 +0200
Articles 2 — 2 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  [PATCH 2/2] btrfs: reada: Fix returned errno code Luis de Bethencourt <luisbg@osg.samsung.com> - 2015-09-22 18:30 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 2/2] btrfs: reada: Fix returned errno code David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz> - 2015-09-23 10:50 +0200

#1230445 — [PATCH 2/2] btrfs: reada: Fix returned errno code

FromLuis de Bethencourt <luisbg@osg.samsung.com>
Date2015-09-22 18:30 +0200
Subject[PATCH 2/2] btrfs: reada: Fix returned errno code
Message-ID<qbyC5-2cv-17@gated-at.bofh.it>
reada is using -1 instead of the -ENOMEM defined macro to specify that
a buffer allocation failed. Since the error number is propagated, the
caller will get a -EPERM which is the wrong error condition.

Smatch tool warning:
reada_add_block() warn: returning -1 instead of -ENOMEM is sloppy

Signed-off-by: Luis de Bethencourt <luisbg@osg.samsung.com>
---
 fs/btrfs/reada.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/btrfs/reada.c b/fs/btrfs/reada.c
index 4645cd1..5bfd3cd 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/reada.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/reada.c
@@ -569,7 +569,7 @@ static int reada_add_block(struct reada_control *rc, u64 logical,
 	rec = kzalloc(sizeof(*rec), GFP_NOFS);
 	if (!rec) {
 		reada_extent_put(root->fs_info, re);
-		return -1;
+		return -ENOMEM;
 	}
 
 	rec->rc = rc;
-- 
2.5.3

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

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#1231239

FromDavid Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
Date2015-09-23 10:50 +0200
Message-ID<qbNUu-7t6-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1230445
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 05:29:39PM +0100, Luis de Bethencourt wrote:
> reada is using -1 instead of the -ENOMEM defined macro to specify that
> a buffer allocation failed. Since the error number is propagated, the
> caller will get a -EPERM which is the wrong error condition.
> 
> Smatch tool warning:
> reada_add_block() warn: returning -1 instead of -ENOMEM is sloppy
> 
> Signed-off-by: Luis de Bethencourt <luisbg@osg.samsung.com>
> ---
>  fs/btrfs/reada.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/reada.c b/fs/btrfs/reada.c
> index 4645cd1..5bfd3cd 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/reada.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/reada.c
> @@ -569,7 +569,7 @@ static int reada_add_block(struct reada_control *rc, u64 logical,
>  	rec = kzalloc(sizeof(*rec), GFP_NOFS);
>  	if (!rec) {
>  		reada_extent_put(root->fs_info, re);
> -		return -1;
> +		return -ENOMEM;

When called from btrfs_reada_add, the return value is ignored and
overriden as ENOMEM. Please also update the caller to return the exact
value from reada_add_block.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web