On Wed, 08/17 10:49, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 15:15:06 +0800
> Fam Zheng <f...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > @@ -613,10 +614,8 @@ void device_add_disk(struct device *parent, struct
> > gendisk *disk)
> > disk->flags |= GENHD_FL_UP;
> >
> > retval = blk_alloc_devt(&disk->part0, &devt);
> > - if (retval) {
> > - WARN_ON(1);
> > - return;
> > - }
> > + if (retval)
> > + goto fail;
> > disk_to_dev(disk)->devt = devt;
> >
> > /* ->major and ->first_minor aren't supposed to be
> > @@ -625,16 +624,26 @@ void device_add_disk(struct device *parent, struct
> > gendisk *disk)
> > disk->major = MAJOR(devt);
> > disk->first_minor = MINOR(devt);
> >
> > - disk_alloc_events(disk);
> > + retval = disk_alloc_events(disk);
> > + if (retval)
> > + goto fail;
> >
> > /* Register BDI before referencing it from bdev */
> > bdi = &disk->queue->backing_dev_info;
> > - bdi_register_owner(bdi, disk_to_dev(disk));
> > + retval = bdi_register_owner(bdi, disk_to_dev(disk));
> > + if (retval)
> > + goto fail;
> >
> > - blk_register_region(disk_devt(disk), disk->minors, NULL,
> > - exact_match, exact_lock, disk);
> > - register_disk(parent, disk);
> > - blk_register_queue(disk);
> > + retval = blk_register_region(disk_devt(disk), disk->minors, NULL,
> > + exact_match, exact_lock, disk);
> > + if (retval)
> > + goto fail;
> > + retval = register_disk(parent, disk);
> > + if (retval)
> > + goto fail;
> > + retval = blk_register_queue(disk);
> > + if (retval)
> > + goto fail;
> >
> > /*
> > * Take an extra ref on queue which will be put on disk_release()
> > @@ -644,10 +653,20 @@ void device_add_disk(struct device *parent, struct
> > gendisk *disk)
> >
> > retval = sysfs_create_link(&disk_to_dev(disk)->kobj, &bdi->dev->kobj,
> > "bdi");
> > + if (retval)
> > + goto fail;
> > +
> > + retval = disk_add_events(disk);
> > + if (retval)
> > + goto fail;
> > +
> > + retval = blk_integrity_add(disk);
> > + if (retval)
> > + goto fail;
> > + return 0;
> > +fail:
> > WARN_ON(retval);
> > -
> > - disk_add_events(disk);
> > - blk_integrity_add(disk);
> > + return retval;
> > }
>
> Noticed this when trying to figure out whether the error handling in
> virtio_blk was correct:
>
> Shouldn't you try to cleanup/rewind so that any structures are in a
> sane state after failure? The caller doesn't know where device_add_disk
> failed, and calling del_gendisk unconditionally like virtio_blk does is
> probably not the right thing to do (at the very least, I don't think
> unregistering a device that has not been registered is likely to work).
>
Yes, I think all callers need to be reviewed before device_add_disk do the
clean up on error. For this patchset I wanted to keep the change small.
Fam
