On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 11:57:01AM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> This is also ok, the function is supposed to return ret or-ed with the
> relevant flags based on the scan position. It is considered error if 0
> is returned (without any flag).
Yeah. You're right. I looked through my list again
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 01:24:50PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 01:10:57PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > In this specific case, writing it as "if (ret != 0)" caused the bug. If
> > we had written it as "if (ret) return ret;" then there are no zeroes so
> > wouldn't have
> From: Dan Carpenter
> Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 18:25
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 01:10:57PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > In this specific case, writing it as "if (ret != 0)" caused the bug. If
> > we had written it as "if (ret) return ret;" then there are no zeroes so
> > wouldn't have bee
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 01:10:57PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> In this specific case, writing it as "if (ret != 0)" caused the bug. If
> we had written it as "if (ret) return ret;" then there are no zeroes so
> wouldn't have been any temptation to return the zero instead of the ret.
I did a sea
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 03:05:16AM +, Dexuan Cui wrote:
> The kind of usage is not rare in the kernel code:
Yeah. But it's used 5% of the time. If it's under 15% then there is a
risk that we'll write a checkpatch rule to enforce the standard way...
There are some places where != 0 is idiomat
> From: Dan Carpenter
> Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 18:36
> To: Dexuan Cui
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 10:09:10AM +, Dexuan Cui wrote:
> > > I'd suggest you do something like
> > >
> > > if (ret == -EAGIAIN)
> > > return 0;
> > > else if (ret)
> > > return ret;
> > >
>
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 10:09:10AM +, Dexuan Cui wrote:
> > I'd suggest you do something like
> >
> > if (ret == -EAGIAIN)
> > return 0;
> > else if (ret)
> > return ret;
> >
> > to make it future-proof (e.g. when a new error is returned by
> > hv_ringbuffer_peek). And
> From: Vitaly Kuznetsov
> Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 22:07
> > diff --git a/drivers/hv/channel.c b/drivers/hv/channel.c
>> ...
> > +int vmbus_recvpacket_hvsock(struct vmbus_channel *channel, void *buffer,
> > + u32 bufferlen, u32 *buffer_actual_len)
> > +{
> > + struct vm
Dexuan Cui writes:
> This will be used by the coming net/hvsock driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dexuan Cui
> ---
> drivers/hv/channel.c | 133
> ++
> drivers/hv/hyperv_vmbus.h | 4 ++
> drivers/hv/ring_buffer.c | 14 +
> include/linux/hyperv.
