On Fri, 6 Jul 2018 15:54:37 -0600 Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 06, 2018 at 11:23:27PM +0200, Oscar Salvador wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 06, 2018 at 01:06:58PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > > The following commit in -next:
> > >
> > > commit 054620849110 ("mm/sparse.c: make sparse_init_one_section void and
> > > remove check")
> > >
> > > changed how the error handling in sparse_add_one_section() works.
> > >
> > > Previously sparse_index_init() could return -EEXIST, and the function would
> > > continue on happily. 'ret' would get unconditionally overwritten by the
> > > result from sparse_init_one_section() and the error code after the 'out:'
> > > label wouldn't be triggered.
> >
> > My bad, I missed that.
> >
> > > diff --git a/mm/sparse.c b/mm/sparse.c
> > > index 9574113fc745..d254bd2d3289 100644
> > > --- a/mm/sparse.c
> > > +++ b/mm/sparse.c
> > > @@ -753,8 +753,12 @@ int __meminit sparse_add_one_section(struct pglist_data *pgdat,
> > > * plus, it does a kmalloc
> > > */
> > > ret = sparse_index_init(section_nr, pgdat->node_id);
> > > - if (ret < 0 && ret != -EEXIST)
> > > - return ret;
> > > + if (ret < 0) {
> > > + if (ret == -EEXIST)
> > > + ret = 0;
> > > + else
> > > + return ret;
> > > + }
> >
> > sparse_index_init() can return:
> >
> > -ENOMEM, -EEXIST or 0.
> >
> > So what about this?:
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/sparse.c b/mm/sparse.c
> > index f55e79fda03e..eb188eb6b82d 100644
> > --- a/mm/sparse.c
> > +++ b/mm/sparse.c
> > @@ -770,6 +770,7 @@ int __meminit sparse_add_one_section(struct pglist_data *pgdat,
> > ret = sparse_index_init(section_nr, pgdat->node_id);
> > if (ret < 0 && ret != -EEXIST)
> > return ret;
> > + ret = 0;
> >
> > Does this look more clean?
>
> Sure, that's probably better.
>
> Andrew, what's the easiest way forward? I can send out a v2, you can fold
> this into his previous patch, or something else?
Whatever ;) v2 works.
