reada is using -1 instead of the -ENOMEM defined macro to specify that a buffer allocation failed. Since the error number is propagated, the caller will get a -EPERM which is the wrong error condition.
Smatch tool warning: reada_add_block() warn: returning -1 instead of -ENOMEM is sloppy Signed-off-by: Luis de Bethencourt <[email protected]> --- fs/btrfs/reada.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/reada.c b/fs/btrfs/reada.c index 4645cd1..5bfd3cd 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/reada.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/reada.c @@ -569,7 +569,7 @@ static int reada_add_block(struct reada_control *rc, u64 logical, rec = kzalloc(sizeof(*rec), GFP_NOFS); if (!rec) { reada_extent_put(root->fs_info, re); - return -1; + return -ENOMEM; } rec->rc = rc; -- 2.5.3 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
