[PATCH v2] mm/hugetlb: fix error code in hugetlbfs_alloc_inode

[PATCH v2] mm/hugetlb: fix error code in hugetlbfs_alloc_inode

[Wanpeng Li]

From: Wanpeng Li <liwp@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

Changelog:
*v2 change -ENOMEM to ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);

When kmem_cache_alloc fails alloc slab object from
hugetlbfs_inode_cachep, return -ENOMEM in usual. But
hugetlbfs_alloc_inode implementation has inconsitency
with it and returns NULL. Fix it to return -ENOMEM.

Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li <liwp.linux@gmail.com>
---
 fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c b/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
index c4b85d0..79a0f33 100644
--- a/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
@@ -696,7 +696,7 @@ static struct inode *hugetlbfs_alloc_inode(struct super_block *sb)
 	p = kmem_cache_alloc(hugetlbfs_inode_cachep, GFP_KERNEL);
 	if (unlikely(!p)) {
 		hugetlbfs_inc_free_inodes(sbinfo);
-		return NULL;
+		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
 	}
 	return &p->vfs_inode;
 }
-- 
1.7.5.4

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH v2] mm/hugetlb: fix error code in hugetlbfs_alloc_inode

[David Rientjes]

On Tue, 10 Jul 2012, Wanpeng Li wrote:

> diff --git a/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c b/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> index c4b85d0..79a0f33 100644
> --- a/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> @@ -696,7 +696,7 @@ static struct inode *hugetlbfs_alloc_inode(struct super_block *sb)
>  	p = kmem_cache_alloc(hugetlbfs_inode_cachep, GFP_KERNEL);
>  	if (unlikely(!p)) {
>  		hugetlbfs_inc_free_inodes(sbinfo);
> -		return NULL;
> +		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
>  	}
>  	return &p->vfs_inode;
>  }

So now you've removed Gavin Shan who already told you that it was correct 
as written and propose yet another bogus patch which will break.  This 
isn't professional.

alloc_inode() tests for a NULL return value, not for PTR_ERR(), so you 
would be introducing a bug if this patch were merged.  It's completely 
correct the way it's written.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH v2] mm/hugetlb: fix error code in hugetlbfs_alloc_inode

[Wanpeng Li]

On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 07:02:39PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
>On Tue, 10 Jul 2012, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>
>> diff --git a/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c b/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
>> index c4b85d0..79a0f33 100644
>> --- a/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
>> +++ b/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
>> @@ -696,7 +696,7 @@ static struct inode *hugetlbfs_alloc_inode(struct super_block *sb)
>>  	p = kmem_cache_alloc(hugetlbfs_inode_cachep, GFP_KERNEL);
>>  	if (unlikely(!p)) {
>>  		hugetlbfs_inc_free_inodes(sbinfo);
>> -		return NULL;
>> +		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
>>  	}
>>  	return &p->vfs_inode;
>>  }
>
>So now you've removed Gavin Shan who already told you that it was correct 
>as written and propose yet another bogus patch which will break.  This 
>isn't professional.
>
>alloc_inode() tests for a NULL return value, not for PTR_ERR(), so you 
>would be introducing a bug if this patch were merged.  It's completely 
>correct the way it's written.

Thank you for your comments David, please ignore the patch.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>