On Wed 12-04-17 08:05:59, Jeff Layton wrote: > The error code should be negative. Since this ends up in the default > case anyway, this is harmless, but it's less confusing to negate it. > Also, later patches will require a negative error code here. > > Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> > Reviewed-by: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Looks good. You can add: Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> Honza > --- > mm/memory-failure.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c > index 27f7210e7fab..4b56e53e5378 100644 > --- a/mm/memory-failure.c > +++ b/mm/memory-failure.c > @@ -674,7 +674,7 @@ static int me_pagecache_dirty(struct page *p, unsigned long pfn) > * the first EIO, but we're not worse than other parts > * of the kernel. > */ > - mapping_set_error(mapping, EIO); > + mapping_set_error(mapping, -EIO); > } > > return me_pagecache_clean(p, pfn); > -- > 2.9.3 > -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR
