Thanks very much for your reply. I will resend the patch later,
Besides, i find there are many places where EIO is used when
'sb_getblk' fails. Shall i replace all of them with ENOMEM?
2013/1/11 Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>:
> On Fri 11-01-13 03:58:28, shilong wang wrote:
>> From: Wang Shilong <wangsl-fnst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> As we know IO ERROR may happen when the function 'sb_getblk' is
>> called. Add necessary check for it.
>>
>> The patch also fix a coding style problem.
> Thanks for the patch. I think returning ENOMEM instead of EIO would be
> better. Otherwise the patch looks OK.
>
> Honza
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong <wangsl-fnst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> fs/ext3/inode.c | 6 +++++-
>> 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/ext3/inode.c b/fs/ext3/inode.c
>> index ff574b4..59b6178 100644
>> --- a/fs/ext3/inode.c
>> +++ b/fs/ext3/inode.c
>> @@ -676,6 +676,10 @@ static int ext3_alloc_branch(handle_t *handle,
>> struct inode *inode,
>> * parent to disk.
>> */
>> bh = sb_getblk(inode->i_sb, new_blocks[n-1]);
>> + if (!bh) {
>> + err = -EIO;
>> + goto failed;
>> + }
>> branch[n].bh = bh;
>> lock_buffer(bh);
>> BUFFER_TRACE(bh, "call get_create_access");
>> @@ -717,7 +721,7 @@ failed:
>> BUFFER_TRACE(branch[i].bh, "call journal_forget");
>> ext3_journal_forget(handle, branch[i].bh);
>> }
>> - for (i = 0; i <indirect_blks; i++)
>> + for (i = 0; i < indirect_blks; i++)
>> ext3_free_blocks(handle, inode, new_blocks[i], 1);
>>
>> ext3_free_blocks(handle, inode, new_blocks[i], num);
>> --
>> 1.7.7.6
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> --
> Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
> SUSE Labs, CR
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
