Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757358AbXJ3Rb5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Oct 2007 13:31:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753591AbXJ3Rbd (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Oct 2007 13:31:33 -0400 Received: from mtagate5.de.ibm.com ([195.212.29.154]:12589 "EHLO mtagate5.de.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753320AbXJ3Rbc (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Oct 2007 13:31:32 -0400 Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 18:31:12 +0100 From: Cornelia Huck To: Dirk Hohndel Cc: Jens Axboe , Andries Brouwer , Al Viro , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] add_partition silently ignored errors Message-ID: <20071030183112.7e860c23@gondolin.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <20071030165608.GA2601@linux.intel.com> References: <20071029154339.00512901@gondolin.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> <20071029154849.GA24187@bigserver.hohndel.org> <20071030080742.GE4993@kernel.dk> <20071030100934.6d2a8f12@gondolin.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> <20071030165608.GA2601@linux.intel.com> Organization: IBM Deutschland Entwicklung GmbH Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Martin Jetter =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Gesch=E4ftsf=FChrung:?= Herbert Kircher Sitz der Gesellschaft: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?B=F6blingen?= Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 243294 X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.0.2 (GTK+ 2.12.1; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1138 Lines: 23 On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 09:56:08 -0700, Dirk Hohndel wrote: > > > IIRC, Al recently vetoed a similar patch. As far as I'm concerned, with > > > the correct return values, the patch then looks fine to me. > > > > We need some kind of check concerning the kobject to avoid mysterious > > errors (especially checking for the failed kobject_add() is needed). > > Whether we want just to inform the user of the failure instead of > > failing the function is another question. > > What are you suggesting? I'd love to make the behaviour consistent everywhere > (and am willing to go through things in order to make that happen), but what is > the consistent behaviour that we'd want? I'd be fine with just propagating the error after cleanup (that is what for example the driver core usually does), but I don't know the surrounding code well enough for a definitive answer. - 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/