Quoting Oren Laadan (orenl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx):
>
>
> serue@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > From: Serge E. Hallyn <serue@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Serge E. Hallyn <serue@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > kernel/cred.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> > 1 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/cred.c b/kernel/cred.c
> > index 62d28a4..c941078 100644
> > --- a/kernel/cred.c
> > +++ b/kernel/cred.c
> > @@ -764,32 +764,46 @@ static struct cred *do_restore_cred(struct ckpt_ctx *ctx)
> > int i;
> >
> > h = ckpt_read_obj_type(ctx, sizeof(*h), CKPT_HDR_CRED);
> > - if (IS_ERR(h))
> > + if (IS_ERR(h)) {
> > + ckpt_err(ctx, ret, "reading cred entry\n");
>
> This error is better reported for _all_ callers of ckpt_read_obj_type()
> from that function ?
>
> I am thinking that moving the report to the specific place where an
> error occurs, plus data from the image file (and location there)
> should be sufficient for debugging.
Yeah, it would help reduce the code size too. I guess I was
thinking the caller would have extra information, but it really
doesn't, or if in the rare caes it does then it can add it. Good
idea.
thanks,
-serge
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
