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 from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/