[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kernel-janitors
Subject:    [KJ] Re: kernel-2.6.9: make sock_init() notice errors
From:       walter harms <wharms () bfs ! de>
Date:       2004-12-15 17:27:08
Message-ID: 41C073EC.5020202 () bfs ! de
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi domen, hi list,

its true that the user can not do much about missing memmory but he 
should know WHAT error occured.
NTL not checking returncodes is an error.
Continuing when one earlier function did not work is also an error and 
may cause problems in unexspected places.
Since this is an init code its no performance consideration to be made.

re,
walter



Domen Puncer wrote:
> On 27/11/04 17:26 +0100, walter harms wrote:
> 
>>Hi list,
>>by accident i found that that sock_init never checks the return code of
>>called init functions. I have no idea why this is not done so i added
>>only a printk() to inform the user about the problem.
>>The function returns no error indicator. i left it this way.
> 
> 
> I don't like this patch: it doesn't really do anything useful...
> ie. if user runs out of memory on boot, he'll have other problems
> than caring about sock_init failing somewhere.
> 
> Comments?
> 
> Also, there's still whitespace damage like:
> 
>>+	ret=init_inodecache();
>>+	if ( ret < 0 ) {
> 
> 
> 


_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
http://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]