From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DA89C433F5 for ; Sat, 4 Sep 2021 02:49:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63F8261056 for ; Sat, 4 Sep 2021 02:49:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1350815AbhIDCuW (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Sep 2021 22:50:22 -0400 Received: from www262.sakura.ne.jp ([202.181.97.72]:52866 "EHLO www262.sakura.ne.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231389AbhIDCuV (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Sep 2021 22:50:21 -0400 Received: from fsav415.sakura.ne.jp (fsav415.sakura.ne.jp [133.242.250.114]) by www262.sakura.ne.jp (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 1842n8gH062510; Sat, 4 Sep 2021 11:49:08 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp) Received: from www262.sakura.ne.jp (202.181.97.72) by fsav415.sakura.ne.jp (F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/550/fsav415.sakura.ne.jp); Sat, 04 Sep 2021 11:49:08 +0900 (JST) X-Virus-Status: clean(F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/550/fsav415.sakura.ne.jp) Received: from [192.168.1.9] (M106072142033.v4.enabler.ne.jp [106.72.142.33]) (authenticated bits=0) by www262.sakura.ne.jp (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 1842n7mM062505 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 4 Sep 2021 11:49:08 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp) Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] block: make __register_blkdev() return an error To: Luis Chamberlain , axboe@kernel.dk, hch@lst.de Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org References: <20210904013932.3182778-1-mcgrof@kernel.org> <20210904013932.3182778-2-mcgrof@kernel.org> From: Tetsuo Handa Message-ID: <9b9e8bfd-a2a6-4b78-413b-7c6c7eb83e05@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2021 11:49:06 +0900 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210904013932.3182778-2-mcgrof@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On 2021/09/04 10:39, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > diff --git a/fs/block_dev.c b/fs/block_dev.c > index 45df6cbccf12..81a4738910a8 100644 > --- a/fs/block_dev.c > +++ b/fs/block_dev.c > @@ -1144,10 +1144,13 @@ struct block_device *blkdev_get_no_open(dev_t dev) > { > struct block_device *bdev; > struct inode *inode; > + int ret; > > inode = ilookup(blockdev_superblock, dev); > if (!inode) { > - blk_request_module(dev); > + ret = blk_request_module(dev); > + if (ret) > + return NULL; Since e.g. loop_add() from loop_probe() returns -EEXIST when /dev/loop$num already exists (e.g. raced with ioctl(LOOP_CTL_ADD)), isn't unconditionally failing an over-failing? > inode = ilookup(blockdev_superblock, dev); > if (!inode) > return NULL; By the way, Jens, will you pick up https://lkml.kernel.org/r/adb1e792-fc0e-ee81-7ea0-0906fc36419d@i-love.sakura.ne.jp before these "add error handling" changes?