Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Welcome. I will see what I can do with respect to cleaning up > the names. > > As for the return value of sysfs_get_dentry that is tricky. In particular > I have three specific cases the code needs to deal with. > > - We got the dentry. > - We did not get the dentry because for this super block there never > ever will be a dentry. > - Some kind of error occurred in attempting to get the dentry. > > Not getting a dentry because it is impossible I am currently handling > with a NULL return. I can equally use a specific error code to mean > that as well. It doesn't much matter. So I guess the hunk in > question could read: > >>> + list_for_each_entry(sb, &sysfs_fs_type.fs_supers, s_instances) { >>> + dentry = sysfs_get_dentry(sb, sd); >>> + if (dentry == ERR_PTR(-ENOENT)) >>> + continue; > > As long as we handle that class of error differently I really don't > care. Yeah, I think using -ENOENT is better; otherwise, my little head feels like exploding. :-) More importantly, sysfs_get_dentry() seems like it would deference ERR_PTR() value. No? -- tejun _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers