Re: [BUG ?] smbfs open always succeeds

[Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com>]

On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 04:33:56PM +0000, tvrtko.ursulin@sophos.com wrote:
> >Not saying that smbfs is right, just explaining that it _might_ be right.
> >
> >Urban, did you see the thread?
> 
> Urban seems to be MIA. Or on a long holiday. :) What shall we do?

It seems Andrew applied this to the -mm tree. 

smb_file_open-retval-fix.patch

From: <tvrtko.ursulin@sophos.com>

Correctly propagate the return value from smb_open().

Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
---

 25-akpm/fs/smbfs/file.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff -puN fs/smbfs/file.c~smb_file_open-retval-fix fs/smbfs/file.c
--- 25/fs/smbfs/file.c~smb_file_open-retval-fix Mon Nov 29 13:08:30 2004
+++ 25-akpm/fs/smbfs/file.c     Mon Nov 29 13:08:38 2004
@@ -363,7 +363,7 @@ smb_file_open(struct inode *inode, struc
        SMB_I(inode)->openers++;
 out:
        unlock_kernel();
-       return 0;
+       return result;
 }