From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266360AbUGAXYL (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Jul 2004 19:24:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266362AbUGAXYL (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Jul 2004 19:24:11 -0400 Received: from e31.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.129]:1211 "EHLO e31.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266360AbUGAXYH (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Jul 2004 19:24:07 -0400 Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 16:17:34 -0500 From: linas@austin.ibm.com To: Greg KH Cc: Dave Hansen , paulus@au1.ibm.com, Paul Mackerras , PPC64 External List , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.6 PPC64: lockfix for rtas error log (third-times-a-charm?)] Message-ID: <20040701161733.J21634@forte.austin.ibm.com> References: <20040701141931.E21634@forte.austin.ibm.com> <1088711355.21679.152.camel@nighthawk> <20040701153117.H21634@forte.austin.ibm.com> <20040701203938.GB23260@kroah.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <20040701203938.GB23260@kroah.com>; from greg@kroah.com on Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 01:39:38PM -0700 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 01:39:38PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > And shouldn't you return -ENOMEM if you are out of memory, and can't log > the message? The current architected interface for this routine is to return the error code as generated by firmware, and not an error code that might be gen'ed during call execution. If we change this convention, then we'd have to audit all 68 uses of this routine to see if any are affected, and fix the ones that are. This is a potentially error-prone process. Also, the likelyhood of having a failed rtas call is supposed to be very small (ideally never), to hava a failed call *and* be out of memory to record the failure seems dim ... the benefit doesn't seem worth it. --linas