From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S932636AbbJHXD5 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 8 Oct 2015 19:03:57 -0400
Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:36859 "EHLO mx2.suse.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S932580AbbJHXDy (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 8 Oct 2015 19:03:54 -0400
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 01:03:53 +0200
From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@suse.com>
To: Josh Boyer <jwboyer@fedoraproject.org>
Cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@do-not-panic.com>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        "Linux-Kernel@Vger. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
        David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@canonical.com>,
        Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>, Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz>,
        Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>, kyle@kernel.org,
        linux-security-module <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
        keyrings@linux-nfs.org, Tom Gundersen <teg@jklm.no>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] firmware: add an extensible system data helpers
Message-ID: <20151008230353.GM14464@wotan.suse.de>
References: <1443721449-22882-1-git-send-email-mcgrof@do-not-panic.com>
 <1443721449-22882-6-git-send-email-mcgrof@do-not-panic.com>
 <CA+5PVA6z81xawNp0_Fw6Ah40CN4yx4ikPNKkKZMTKf3GtdyTbQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CA+5PVA6z81xawNp0_Fw6Ah40CN4yx4ikPNKkKZMTKf3GtdyTbQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 01:59:11PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
> > +static inline int desc_sync_found_call_cb(const struct sysdata_file_desc *desc,
> > +                                         const struct sysdata_file *sysdata)
> > +{
> > +       BUG_ON(desc->sync_reqs.mode != SYNCDATA_SYNC);
> 
> ngh...  Why do these inline functions all have BUG_ONs in them?  If it
> is to catch a programming error, why can't you just return EINVAL like
> you do in the async function case?  (Even that WARN_ON seems
> excessive).

Sure, I've replaced the pesky BUG_ON() with returning -EINVAL's.
Let me know if there is anything else.

  Luis