Re: [PATCH] fs/9p: Initialize status in v9fs_file_do_lock.

["Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>]

On Fri, Jan 09, 2015 at 02:07:23PM +0100, Dominique Martinet wrote:
> Kirill A. Shutemov wrote on Fri, Jan 09, 2015 at 02:33:53PM +0200:
> > On Fri, Jan 09, 2015 at 12:56:07PM +0100, Dominique Martinet wrote:
> > > If p9_client_lock_dotl returns an error, status is possibly never filled
> > > but will be used in the following switch.
> > > Initializing it to P9_LOCK_ERROR makes sur we will return an error and
> > > cleanup (and not hit the default case).
> > 
> > That's what my patch[1] fixes.
> > 
> > http://marc.info/?i=1419858019-116944-1-git-send-email-kirill.shutemov%40linux.intel.com
> 
> Actually, it's slightly different and still worth adding (mine if we
> apply your's first and your's if we apply mine first - don't think
> they'll conflict. I even reworded the (too old!) commit message to fit
> with your patch :))
> 
> Your patch will not BUG() if status is junk, BUT if status uninitialized
> value is 0 and p9_client_lock_dotl then we'll return res=0 (success) and
> not unlock before returning. My patch makes sure we'll return -ENOLCK.

No, if p9_client_lock_dotl() return 0 it must set status. If it's not,
that's bug on p9_client_lock_dotl() side and must be fixed.

-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov