Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 20 Feb 2007 14:26:52 -0800 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | Re: securityfs_create_dir strange comment |
| |
On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 03:18:49PM -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > Quoting Jan Engelhardt (jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de): > > Hello list, > > > > > > in security/inode.c, the comment for securityfs_create_dir() reads: > > > > If securityfs is not enabled in the kernel, the value -ENODEV > > will be returned. It is not wise to check for this value, but > > rather, check for NULL or !NULL instead as to eliminate the need > > for #ifdef in the calling code. > > > > What is the actual callee that can return NULL - and what should > > module_init() of a module return when securityfs_create_dir() returns > > NULL? > > Hmm, this came from GregKH. It does seem based on the code that > checking for -ENODEV is necessary, so I don't understand the comment.
If securityfs_create_dir() returns NULL, then something bad happened and your code needs to properly recover from it.
Other than that, I don't understand the issue here.
confused,
greg k-h - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |