On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 11:41 PM, Al Stone <ahs3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 07/01/2016 03:32 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 11:21 PM, Al Stone <ahs3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Without this patch, the acpi_parse_entries_array() function will return >>> the very first time there is any error found in either the array of >>> callback functions or if one of the callbacks returns an non-zero value. >>> However, the array of callbacks could still have valid entries further >>> on in the array, or the callbacks may be able to process subsequent >>> subtables without error. The change here makes the function consistent >>> with its description so that it will properly return the sum of all >>> matching entries for all proc handlers, instead of stopping abruptly >>> as it does today. >> >> I'm not sure I follow. >> >> You seem to be saying that the function should process all of the >> subtables etc even though errors have been found for some of them, but >> it still will return an error in the end if there are any errors. How >> exactly does it help to continue processing in case of an error, then? > > The use case I have in mind is to simply count all of the subtables of > a certain type. If for some reason, the callback -- or any other callback > -- fails, the traversal of all the subtables stops immediately. So, I > could have two callbacks, and if the first one fails on the first subtable > of its type, traversal stops. The count for the second callback will be > zero which may or may not be correct. It will be zero, because the callback has not been invoked at all. Why is this incorrect? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
