On 09/12/2019 03:09 PM, André Almeida wrote:
> Hello Matthew,
>
> On 9/12/19 1:19 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 11:46:36AM -0300, André Almeida wrote:
>>>
>>> -static int nr_devices = 1;
>>> +static unsigned int nr_devices = 1;
>>> module_param(nr_devices, int, 0444);
>>
>> ^^^ you forgot to change the module_param to match
>>
>>> + if (!nr_devices) {
>>> + pr_err("null_blk: invalid number of devices\n");
>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>> + }
>>
>> I don't think this is necessary.
>>
>
> Could you explain why you don't think is necessary? As I see, the module
> can't be used without any /dev/nullb* device, so why we should load it?
>
> Thanks,
> André
>
I think Matthew is right here. I think module can be loaded with
nr_devices=0.
Did you get a chance to test nr_device=0 condition ?
Also, did you get a chance to test this patch with all the
possible conditions ?
