On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 10:39:06PM +0100, Hans J. Koch wrote: > On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 01:16:19PM +0200, Vitalii Demianets wrote: > > On Friday 30 November 2012 01:58:22 Hans J. Koch wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 06:36:59PM +0200, Vitalii Demianets wrote: > > > > > On Thursday 29 November 2012 18:05:27 Tux9 wrote: > > > > > > Hans, I think there are something wrong in your patch, while > > > > > > Vitalii's is right. The variable "ret" is reused in line 292 and > > > > > > line > > > > > > 295, so the value of "ret" would be overridden (if it goto err_map > > > > > > in > > > > > > line 284 when mi>=1). > > > > > > > > > > Actually, both patches do exactly the same thing. Hans's patch > > > > > establishes default value for the ret for all those "other" cases when > > > > > ret is not explicitly overridden. My patch explicitly enumerates all > > > > > those "other" cases in more wordily manner. > > > > > > > > Oops, disregard this. After looking at it more thoroughly I got your > > > > point. You are right, ret is overridden at first iteration (mi == 0), so > > > > Hans's approach does not work. > > > > I must do more thinking before replying in a hurry. > > > > > > You're right. Initialization of "ret" has to take place at the beginning > > > of > > > the loop. > > > > > > I think this version is right: > > > > Yes, this looks right for me. > > OK, I'll send that patch offically, then. This might also be material for > the stable updates. Greg?
Yes, that sounds good. greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
