Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 31 Aug 2023 09:50:23 +0530 | From | Atul Kumar Pant <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v1] drivers: edac: Drop unnecessary error check for debugfs_create_dir |
| |
On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 04:00:41PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote: > > > On 8/28/23 15:35, Atul Kumar Pant wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 09:31:54AM +0200, Michal Simek wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 8/15/23 22:38, Atul Kumar Pant wrote: > > > > This patch removes the error checking for debugfs_create_dir. > > > > > > Avoid using "This patch". > > > > Thanks for pointing this out. I'll remember this. > > > > > > > > > Even if we get an error from this function, other debugfs APIs will > > > > handle the error value and doesn't crash in that case. Hence caller can > > > > safely ignore the errors that occur during the creation of debugfs nodes. > > > > > > First of all which issue do you have? Did you see that folder is not created? > > > > I have not seen any issue as such. But going by the comments before > > the debugfs_create_dir API (https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/fs/debugfs/inode.c#L583), > > we can ignore safely ignore the return value from this API. > > > > > > > > I am not quite sure if this is the right behavior. > > > In the code there is > > > 135 if (!parent) > > > 136 parent = edac_debugfs; > > > > > > It means you are right that if creating ocm folder can fail and properties > > > will be still created under edac_debugfs but is this the right behavior? > > > > > > altera_edac/armada_xp_edac/i10nm/i5100/igen6/others are checking return > > > value that's why I can't see any reason to remove this checking from one > > > driver. > > > > > > If you want to fix all please send patch for all but I don't think it will > > > improve situation and it will just hide different issue if creating folder > > > fails. > > > > Understood your point. Are you suggesting that we should keep these > > checks as it is, or should I fix for all the drivers and upload the > > patch ? > > Up to Boris to decide but I would say keep it as is. Even debugfs is not > stable interface I would like to be informed if something fails. But just > 2c.
Thanks you Michal. I'll wait for the reply from Boris.
> > Thanks, > Michal > > >
| |