Re: [PATCH 10/10] fs:btrfs: return -ENOMEM on allocation failure.

[David Sterba]

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 01:02:19PM +0530, Allen Pais wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Allen Pais 
> ---
>  fs/btrfs/check-integrity.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/check-integrity.c b/fs/btrfs/check-integrity.c
> index 7d5a9b5..efa4c23 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/check-integrity.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/check-integrity.c
> @@ -2913,7 +2913,7 @@ int btrfsic_mount(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
>   state = kvzalloc(sizeof(*state), GFP_KERNEL);
>   if (!state) {
>   pr_info("btrfs check-integrity: allocation failed!\n");
> - return -1;
> + return -ENOMEM;

Makes sense, also please fix the -1 a few lines below that also result
from failed memory allocation, indirectly from btrfsic_dev_state_alloc().

>   }
>  
>   if (!btrfsic_is_initialized) {
> -- 
> 2.7.4
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
> the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: merging printk and WARN

[David Sterba]

On Sun, Nov 04, 2012 at 09:25:53PM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
 It looks like these patches were not a good idea, because in each case the
 printk provides an error level, and WARN then provides another one.

I think this is not a problem within btrfs at the place where this has
changed.

david
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-scsi in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html