Re: [PATCH] CodingStyle: add some more error handling guidelines
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Date: 2016-08-22 19:42:09
Also in:
lkml
Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)
- 2016-08-23 · Re: [PATCH] CodingStyle: add some more error handling guidelines · Dan Carpenter <hidden>
- 2016-08-23 · Re: [PATCH] CodingStyle: add some more error handling guidelines · Bjørn Mork <bjorn@mork.no>
- 2016-08-23 · Re: [PATCH] CodingStyle: add some more error handling guidelines · Dan Carpenter <hidden>
- 2016-08-23 · Re: [PATCH] CodingStyle: add some more error handling guidelines · Bjørn Mork <bjorn@mork.no>
- 2016-08-22 · Re: [PATCH] CodingStyle: add some more error handling guidelines · "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 09:50:06PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 05:53:02PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:quoted
The point is really naming label for the part of init that failed (and so needs to be skipped), rather than the part that will run.Naming labels after what "needs to be skipped" doesn't work. How does that meaning make sense for err_cgroup in vhost_dev_set_owner()? What needs to be skipped here? regards, dan carpenter
Nothing because we are destroying the thread, so we don't need to detach it. I guess I'm convinced it's not very consistent at this point. -- MST