Re: [PATCH] fix return value error

2015-10-14 Thread Leon Romanovsky
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Marciniszyn, Mike wrote: >> > Subject: [PATCH] fix return value error >> > >> >> I checked returns in configfs (-ENOMEM), proc (-ENOENT), proc-sys (- >> ENOMEM), ramfs (-ENOSPC), vfs (-ENOMEM). >> >> Not entirely c

RE: [PATCH] fix return value error

2015-10-14 Thread Marciniszyn, Mike
> > Subject: [PATCH] fix return value error > > > > I checked returns in configfs (-ENOMEM), proc (-ENOENT), proc-sys (- > ENOMEM), ramfs (-ENOSPC), vfs (-ENOMEM). > > Not entirely consistent but this matches the majority. > > I agree -EPERM is pretty misleading

RE: [PATCH] fix return value error

2015-10-14 Thread Marciniszyn, Mike
> Subject: [PATCH] fix return value error > I checked returns in configfs (-ENOMEM), proc (-ENOENT), proc-sys (-ENOMEM), ramfs (-ENOSPC), vfs (-ENOMEM). Not entirely consistent but this matches the majority. I agree -EPERM is pretty misleading. Acked-by: Mike Marciniszyn -- To unsub

Re: [PATCH] fix return value error

2015-10-14 Thread Or Gerlitz
On 10/14/2015 2:59 PM, Leon Romanovsky wrote: On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Heloise NH wrote: >Signed-off-by: Heloise NH The patch is a correct one, however can you update the subject and description to be more informative? Please add that new_inode() function can fail for allocation

Re: [PATCH] fix return value error

2015-10-14 Thread Leon Romanovsky
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Heloise NH wrote: > Signed-off-by: Heloise NH The patch is a correct one, however can you update the subject and description to be more informative? Please add that new_inode() function can fail for allocation only. > --- >

[PATCH] fix return value error

2015-10-14 Thread Heloise NH
Signed-off-by: Heloise NH --- drivers/infiniband/hw/ipath/ipath_fs.c | 2 +- drivers/infiniband/hw/qib/qib_fs.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/ipath/ipath_fs.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/ipath/ipath_fs.c index 25422a3..da753bc

[PATCH] fix return value error

2015-10-14 Thread Heloise NH
Signed-off-by: Heloise NH --- drivers/infiniband/hw/ipath/ipath_fs.c | 2 +- drivers/infiniband/hw/qib/qib_fs.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/ipath/ipath_fs.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/ipath/ipath_fs.c index 25422a3..da753bc

RE: [PATCH] fix return value error

2015-10-14 Thread Marciniszyn, Mike
> > Subject: [PATCH] fix return value error > > > > I checked returns in configfs (-ENOMEM), proc (-ENOENT), proc-sys (- > ENOMEM), ramfs (-ENOSPC), vfs (-ENOMEM). > > Not entirely consistent but this matches the majority. > > I agree -EPERM is pretty misleading

Re: [PATCH] fix return value error

2015-10-14 Thread Leon Romanovsky
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Marciniszyn, Mike <mike.marcinis...@intel.com> wrote: >> > Subject: [PATCH] fix return value error >> > >> >> I checked returns in configfs (-ENOMEM), proc (-ENOENT), proc-sys (- >> ENOMEM), ramfs (-ENOSPC), vf

[PATCH] fix return value error

2015-10-14 Thread Heloise NH
Signed-off-by: Heloise NH --- drivers/infiniband/hw/ipath/ipath_fs.c | 2 +- drivers/infiniband/hw/qib/qib_fs.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/ipath/ipath_fs.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/ipath/ipath_fs.c index

[PATCH] fix return value error

2015-10-14 Thread Heloise NH
Signed-off-by: Heloise NH --- drivers/infiniband/hw/ipath/ipath_fs.c | 2 +- drivers/infiniband/hw/qib/qib_fs.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/ipath/ipath_fs.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/ipath/ipath_fs.c index

Re: [PATCH] fix return value error

2015-10-14 Thread Leon Romanovsky
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Heloise NH wrote: > Signed-off-by: Heloise NH The patch is a correct one, however can you update the subject and description to be more informative? Please add that new_inode() function can fail for allocation only. > --- >

Re: [PATCH] fix return value error

2015-10-14 Thread Or Gerlitz
On 10/14/2015 2:59 PM, Leon Romanovsky wrote: On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Heloise NH wrote: >Signed-off-by: Heloise NH The patch is a correct one, however can you update the subject and description to be more informative? Please add that new_inode()

RE: [PATCH] fix return value error

2015-10-14 Thread Marciniszyn, Mike
> Subject: [PATCH] fix return value error > I checked returns in configfs (-ENOMEM), proc (-ENOENT), proc-sys (-ENOMEM), ramfs (-ENOSPC), vfs (-ENOMEM). Not entirely consistent but this matches the majority. I agree -EPERM is pretty misleading. Acked-by: Mike Marciniszyn <mike