Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756243AbaFQQJz (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jun 2014 12:09:55 -0400 Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com ([66.63.167.143]:49627 "EHLO bedivere.hansenpartnership.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755631AbaFQQJy (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jun 2014 12:09:54 -0400 Message-ID: <1403021389.27991.11.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/24] kobject: return actual error on kset_create_and_add From: James Bottomley To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Greg KH , Jeff Liu , Andrew Morton , Pekka Enberg , Matt Mackall , benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, davem@davemloft.net, stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de, joro@8bytes.org, jejb@parisc-linux.org, deller@gmx.de, bhelgaas@google.com, clm@fb.com, Josef Bacik , swhiteho@redhat.com, bharrosh@panasas.com, bhalevy@primarydata.com, ccaulfie@redhat.com, teigland@redhat.com, "Theodore Ts'o" , adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, jaegeuk@kernel.org, cm224.lee@samsung.com, Mark Fasheh , Joel Becker , casey@schaufler-ca.com, LKML Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:09:49 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: <53A04FF7.5050900@oracle.com> <20140617154730.GA14153@kroah.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2014-06-17 at 11:00 -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Tue, 17 Jun 2014, Greg KH wrote: > > > Who really cares about that? What can do you do with that additional > > information that will help anything out? > > The obvious reason for doing so is so that one can put the error code into > a log message to get more detailed information on why the call failed. > > In this particular case the slab allocator can give an error message that > gives a hint why the sysfs support could not be enabled. What useful information does this supply? The current assumption on NULL return is -ENOMEM ... what's the interesting case where this assumption is wrong? James -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/