On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 04:48:02AM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > Overall: I suspect that Joe might be right. The very few callers that > use the return value and use it correctly can bloody well call > seq_overflow(), preferably with a detailed comment about the reasons > for doing so. Anything that really wants the length of output (if we > have such places at all) can use %n or see Figure 1. I haven't > crawled through lib/*, net/* and sound/* yet, but that's how the things > look so far.
The same goes for seq_puts, seq_escape, seq_vprintf, seq_dentry, seq_bitmap*, seq_cpumask*, seq_nodemask*, seq_putc, seq_put_decimal* seq_puts() has one buggy user trying to return its return value from ->show(). seq_putc() has several such. seq_path() returns length and in one case its return value is used (right-padded pathname in /proc/swaps). seq_path_root() returns what would be a valid return value for ->show() (0 or 1, actually). seq_write() return value is mostly ignored; kernel/trace/* is using it to check for overflows, but its reaction to said overflows is odd. The bottom line: most of these guys could as well return void; we have few overflow checks and those could be made explicit. As it is, "return -1 on overflow" had been a mistake. Mea culpa. -- 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/
