xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] xfs: lobotomise xfs_trans_read_buf_map()

To: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: lobotomise xfs_trans_read_buf_map()
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2014 02:51:22 -0800
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20141202224518.GG18131@dastard>
References: <1417473290-17544-1-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20141202165930.GA28571@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20141202224518.GG18131@dastard>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 09:45:18AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > Can you fix the inconsistent return for the trylock case in a follow on
> > patch?  This difference doesn't look intentional to me, and I would
> > be surprised if it's correctly handled in the callers.
> 
> Ok, I'll do an audit and make this common in a follow up patch. Just
> to confirm:
> 
>               if (!(flags & XBF_TRYLOCK))
>                       return -ENOMEM;
>               return -EAGAIN;
> 
> is what you want to see, right?

Yes.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>