On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 10:20:55PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 07:00:39AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > - if (PTR_ERR(folio) == -ENOENT ||
> > > - !(IS_ERR(folio) && !folio_test_uptodate(folio))) {
> > > + if (folio == ERR_PTR(-ENOENT) ||
> > > + (!IS_ERR(folio) && !folio_test_uptodate(folio))) {
> > >
> > > (Note that PTR_ERR() shouldn't be used before it's known that the
> > > pointer is an error pointer.)
> >
> > That's new to me, and I can't find anything in the documentation or
> > implementation suggesting that. Your example code above also does
> > this as does plenty of code in the kernel elsewhere.
>
> Not sure why this is controversial. The documentation for PTR_ERR() is
> clear that it's for error pointers:
>
> /**
> * PTR_ERR - Extract the error code from an error pointer.
> * @ptr: An error pointer.
> * Return: The error code within @ptr.
> */
> static inline long __must_check PTR_ERR(__force const void *ptr)
> {
> return (long) ptr;
> }
>
> Yes, it's really just a cast, and 'PTR_ERR(folio) == -ENOENT' actually
> still works when folio isn't necessarily an error pointer. But normally
> it would be written as a pointer comparison as I suggested.
How does one know that a pointer is an error pointer? Oughtn't there be
some kind of obvious marker, or is IS_ERR the only tool we've got?
--D
> - Eric
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
