From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id q9Q8mTVw215977 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2012 03:48:29 -0500 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (173-166-109-252-newengland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.166.109.252]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id hG9NNNMPaHtE5aEX (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2012 01:50:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 04:50:14 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 21/25] xfs: add buffer pre-write callback Message-ID: <20121026085014.GC3035@infradead.org> References: <1351146854-19343-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1351146854-19343-22-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1351146854-19343-22-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.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: Dave Chinner Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com > /* > + * run the pre-io callback function if it exists. If this function > + * fails it will mark the buffer with an error and the IO should > + * not be dispatched. > + */ > + if (bp->b_pre_io) { > + bp->b_pre_io(bp); > + if (bp->b_error) { Wouldn't it be a cleaner calling convention to return the erro from the callback? _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs