From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id q1S3RnUY149973 for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2012 21:27:51 -0600 Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 22:27:40 -0500 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] xfs: merge xfs_qm_export_dquot into xfs_qm_scall_getquota Message-ID: <20120228032740.GA18306@infradead.org> References: <20120220022815.018921977@bombadil.infradead.org> <20120220022903.488870885@bombadil.infradead.org> <20120227015941.GI7762@sgi.com> <20120227171727.GA22046@infradead.org> <20120227172310.GH28391@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120227172310.GH28391@sgi.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Ben Myers Cc: Christoph Hellwig , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 11:23:10AM -0600, Ben Myers wrote: > On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 12:17:27PM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > I should have replied to this patch, not the older rev. > > > > > > I have a question about the error code, now we're not mapping errors to > > > EFAULT and we used do... which is correct? > > > > The old one looks finshy, but we even if we changed it it should be > > in a separate patch with a good description. I'll resend with this bit > > fixed. > > Sounds great. ;) Actually the patch is fine as-is. If you look at the old xfs_qm_scall_getquota we'd return any error we get from xfs_qm_dqget as-is, and return ENOENT if XFS_IS_DQUOT_UNINITIALIZED is true. The place where any other error is converted to EFAULT is never actually reached. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs