On Wed 12-04-17 08:05:59, Jeff Layton wrote:
> The error code should be negative. Since this ends up in the default
> case anyway, this is harmless, but it's less confusing to negate it.
> Also, later patches will require a negative error code here.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Ross Zwisler <[email protected]>

Looks good. You can add:

Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <[email protected]>

                                                                Honza

> ---
>  mm/memory-failure.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c
> index 27f7210e7fab..4b56e53e5378 100644
> --- a/mm/memory-failure.c
> +++ b/mm/memory-failure.c
> @@ -674,7 +674,7 @@ static int me_pagecache_dirty(struct page *p, unsigned 
> long pfn)
>                * the first EIO, but we're not worse than other parts
>                * of the kernel.
>                */
> -             mapping_set_error(mapping, EIO);
> +             mapping_set_error(mapping, -EIO);
>       }
>  
>       return me_pagecache_clean(p, pfn);
> -- 
> 2.9.3
> 
-- 
Jan Kara <[email protected]>
SUSE Labs, CR

Reply via email to