Re: staging: lustre: Optimize error handling in class_register_type()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> NAK.
> when you do this, the next statement below breaks:

I wonder about this conclusion.


>> 	type = kzalloc(sizeof(*type), GFP_NOFS);
>> 	if (!type)
>> -		return rc;
>> +		return -ENOMEM;
>>
>> 	type->typ_dt_ops = kzalloc(sizeof(*type->typ_dt_ops), GFP_NOFS);
>> 	if (!type->typ_dt_ops) {
>
>                 goto failed;
> 
>  failed:
>
> return rc;
> 
> So we are now returning an unitialized rc, did you get a gcc warning about it when compiling?

I do not get such an impression if my corresponding update suggestion
"[PATCH 04/12] staging: lustre: Split a condition check in class_register_type()"
will be considered for this use case once more.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/7/26/462
https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg1197227.html

Regards,
Markus
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [DMA Engine]     [Linux GPIO]     [Linux SPI]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Coverity]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Yosemite Backpacking]
  Powered by Linux