On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 21:09, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@xxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 03:52:58PM +1000, Julian Calaby wrote: >> Given that patches 3, 4 and 5 seem to be a cases of missing error >> handling, (3 and 4 in particular seem to be breaking things rather >> than fixing them) in my humble opinion, I think this set needs some >> work and discussion. >> >> Justin, maybe you'd be better off posting the actual error messages >> (split up by subsystem) and letting the lists discuss them, rather >> than posting patches which are obviously wrong. (like the ones I've >> pointed out) > > My first impression of patch 5 was "that can't be right", but upon review, > I concluded that was the best solution. If we return the PTR_ERR, this > is going to confuse every user of scsi_host_alloc who are currently only > checking for NULL. I did a double take at patch 4 when skimming over them, then took a proper look at the lot of them. Whilst I agree that 5 isn't doing anything particularly bad, it does seem wrong, especially in the context of 3 and 4. Thanks, -- Julian Calaby Email: julian.calaby@xxxxxxxxx .Plan: http://sites.google.com/site/juliancalaby/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
