From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1751289AbXCZKel@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751289AbXCZKel (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 26 Mar 2007 06:34:41 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753623AbXCZKel
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Mon, 26 Mar 2007 06:34:41 -0400
Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.188]:50592 "EHLO
	nf-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751289AbXCZKej (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 26 Mar 2007 06:34:39 -0400
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent:from;
        b=KTUqvo4UdpdEWlTIPXSRRzm7rkzcWq/b0Q9V8Vp1EZGOykD9Cbir9aRl9dvFGxtmN5Kt515t71ui68Gxkbb9UNBLX/U0/Eepg8nZ+LBYFRgfXQxs65JFqHAhAq1fCM5ERhn+nlfvfS6pI9oz4OiuNSa26ApezdDuR/VesmaTp68=
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 12:34:33 +0200
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com>,
       Larry Finger <larry.finger@lwfinger.net>,
       Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, Monakhov Dmitriy <dmonakhov@openvz.org>
Subject: Re: 2.6.21-rc4-mm1
Message-ID: <20070326103432.GB18799@zenigma>
References: <20070321202225.GN10459@waste.org> <20070321233917.0393dfd1.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070322123508.3785fd30@gondolin.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> <4602752A.5050109@lwfinger.net> <20070322181019.62fe78ed@gondolin.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> <4602D137.4060402@lwfinger.net> <20070323111029.4089ccfb@gondolin.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> <20070323210618.6a41f5da.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070326110949.5301a571@gondolin.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> <20070326012232.0f0b9e09.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20070326012232.0f0b9e09.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i
From: Eric Rannaud <eric.rannaud@gmail.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Mar 26, 2007 at 01:22:32AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 11:09:49 +0200 Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > If so, do you think I should labour on with
> > > uevent-improve-error-checking-and-handling.patch plus your fix, or should I
> > > drop the lot?  (I'm inclined toward the latter, but I'm still not
> > > sure which patch(es) need to be dropped).
> > 
> > This depends on what semantics uevent returning an error code should
> > have. The firmware code was using it to suppress uevents, but
> > uevent_suppress is a better idea now. So if we want uevent returning !=
> > 0 to imply "something really bad happened", all uevent functions have
> > to be audited and those that work like firmware_uevent have to be
> > converted to uevent_suppress. This would be cleaner, but I'm not sure
> > it's worth the work.
> 
> We're generally struggling to stay alive amongst all the bugs at present -
> I'll drop all those patches.

My mistake, I wrote the guilty patch
uevent-improve-error-checking-and-handling.patch assuming it was safe to
treat the return value as an error code, since several uevent functions
returns things like -ENOMEM.

Should I rework the patch as Cornelia suggests and resubmit later, when
things have settled down a little?

Thanks.