> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2019 10:05 AM
> To: Gal Pressman <galpress@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: linux-rdma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Parav Pandit <parav@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] RDMA/device: Check that the rename is nop under
> the lock
>
> On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 04:14:28PM +0200, Gal Pressman wrote:
> > On 04-Feb-19 23:17, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Since another rename could be running in parallel it is safer to
> > > check that the name is not changing inside the lock, where we
> > > already know the device name will not change.
> > >
> > > Fixes: d21943dd19b5 ("RDMA/core: Implement IB device rename
> > > function")
> > > Signed-off-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Reviewed-by: Parav Pandit <parav@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > drivers/infiniband/core/device.c | 10 ++++++----
> > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/core/device.c
> > > b/drivers/infiniband/core/device.c
> > > index 55221990d946b2..f9f33e842c16b6 100644
> > > +++ b/drivers/infiniband/core/device.c
> > > @@ -189,12 +189,14 @@ static struct ib_device
> > > *__ib_device_get_by_name(const char *name)
> > >
> > > int ib_device_rename(struct ib_device *ibdev, const char *name) {
> > > - int ret = 0;
> > > -
> > > - if (!strcmp(name, dev_name(&ibdev->dev)))
> > > - return ret;
> > > + int ret;
> > >
> > > mutex_lock(&device_mutex);
> > > + if (!strcmp(name, dev_name(&ibdev->dev))) {
> > > + ret = -EEXIST;
> >
> > Why did this change to an error?
>
> Hmm.. Probably shouldn't change it - even though I think this version is
> more appropriate.
>
I think we should return 0 for same name.
> Jason
