From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752511AbbE0FxC (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 27 May 2015 01:53:02 -0400
Received: from mail-pd0-f172.google.com ([209.85.192.172]:33253 "EHLO
	mail-pd0-f172.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751585AbbE0FxA (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 27 May 2015 01:53:00 -0400
Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 14:53:20 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Marcin Jabrzyk <m.jabrzyk@samsung.com>,
        Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] zram: check comp algorithm availability earlier
Message-ID: <20150527055320.GA3928@swordfish>
References: <1432646017-1367-1-git-send-email-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
 <20150527035142.GA11609@blaptop>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150527035142.GA11609@blaptop>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On (05/27/15 12:51), Minchan Kim wrote:
[..]
> > @@ -378,6 +378,12 @@ static ssize_t comp_algorithm_store(struct device *dev,
> >  	if (sz > 0 && zram->compressor[sz - 1] == '\n')
> >  		zram->compressor[sz - 1] = 0x00;
> >  
> > +	if (!zcomp_available_algorithm(zram->compressor)) {
> > +		pr_err("Error: unavailable compression algorithm: %s\n",
> > +				zram->compressor);
> > +		len = -EINVAL;
> > +	}
> > +
> 
> I'm not against this patch because it's better than old.
> But let's think more about the pr_err part.
> 
> If user try to set wrong algo name, he can see EINVAL.
> Isn't it enough?
> 
> I think every sane admin can think he passed wrong argument
> if he sees -EINVAL.
> So, I don't think we need to emit pr_err in here.
> 

well, it's here simply to make failure investigation easier.
one surely will know that supplied string was not recognized
as a compression algorithm name, but what was it.. "$3 instead
of $2... or, wait, did $i contain something wrong?". zram knew
what was wrong.

/* and you asked to put this warn here in your previous email. */


sure, can remove it.


> The reason I am paranoid about that is that I really don't want
> to argue with syslog info which is part of ABI or not in future.
> If possible, I don't want to depend on pr_xxx.
> 

just for the record...  I don't understand this part.


ok. I'll resend later today.

	-ss