Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 24 Apr 2020 11:21:25 +0200
From:   Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc:     Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
        Tim Waugh <tim@cyberelk.net>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] isofs: stop using ioctl_by_bdev
Message-ID: <20200424092125.GA13069@quack2.suse.cz>
References: <20200423071224.500849-1-hch@lst.de>
 <20200423071224.500849-7-hch@lst.de>
 <20200423110347.GE3737@quack2.suse.cz>
 <20200424065253.GB23754@lst.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200424065253.GB23754@lst.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri 24-04-20 08:52:53, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 01:03:47PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > There's no error handling in the caller and this function actually returns
> > unsigned int... So I believe you need to return 0 here to maintain previous
> > behavior (however suspicious it may be)?
> 
> Indeed, and I don't think it is suspicious at all - if we have no CDROM
> info we should assume session 0, which is the same as for non-CDROM
> devices.  Fixed for the next version.

Right, I've realized that once I've checked UDF version and thought about
it for a while...

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR