On Fri, 1 May 2009 13:16:22 +0200
Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@vrfy.org> wrote:

> On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 07:29, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> 
> > dev->type->nodename() might have failed due to -ENOMEM, in which case
> > it seems wrong to assume that it returned NULL for <whatever reason you
> > thought it might want to return NULL>.
> >
> > It's all a bit confused.
> 
> This logic is only for providing a custom name hint. Only a few
> devices need that at all. If the allocation fails, the default name
> will be used, not the custom name.

But that's bad, isn't it?  It means that the kernel will come up with
one name if the memory allcoation succeeded, and a different name if
the allocation failed.

--
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/