On Tue, 10 Jul 2012, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >>diff --git a/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c b/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> >>index c4b85d0..79a0f33 100644
> >>--- a/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> >>+++ b/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> >>@@ -696,7 +696,7 @@ static struct inode *hugetlbfs_alloc_inode(struct super_block *sb)
> >> p = kmem_cache_alloc(hugetlbfs_inode_cachep, GFP_KERNEL);
> >> if (unlikely(!p)) {
> >> hugetlbfs_inc_free_inodes(sbinfo);
> >>- return NULL;
> >>+ return -ENOMEM;
> >
> >The function is expecting "struct inode *", man.
> >
> >static struct inode *hugetlbfs_alloc_inode(struct super_block *sb)
> >
> Hmm, replace it by ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM).
>
Please listen to the feedback you're getting before you reply.
This function is called by alloc_inode(). It tests whether the return
value is NULL or not, it doesn't check for PTR_ERR(). It's correct the
way it's written and you would have broken it.
In the future, please demonstrate how you've tested your patches before
proposing them.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>