From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D332F48EBF7; Mon, 12 Oct 2026 14:28:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791815320; cv=none; b=Gzew2OdgoSNC0+i2aIAxJnYjVZq4/nzWAl3fv0Rum/0MYRe6WN/ir/7P1/SjVIfODVzi0+igaKqUijMJVdt/qfOSAqoYEGKm03a6+AeFqgpUJm4Yx/0Qqwfxo/E37jCpLkTsbdTtcl7/SNQDGBrdFxvlD1Wo10csIPO+ZPAWDwk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791815320; c=relaxed/simple; bh=LSC1F0gNJ/tf/eKcy6aMkllJELOSTn3WRLxZHRhf+iM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=cBkJ9llJPceP/VbW7F7oog5bXVGcrLI5rv/lAtkKbjDw2LbHB6ZoNGTuNu2au/LrMhcEA6gLE3Tc9Jok/D+6RvW5Q817iXCRNkpcS3UkJYZ++ZTDSq+E2HBEAzy9tKoXZqehAueNWB2UHOg5piTpu5LhzHTX8t4GbDIBYyPaLe4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=GcfbZTTg; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="GcfbZTTg" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E317C1F0089B; Mon, 12 Oct 2026 14:28:36 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1791815319; bh=7Ra23l3UluV2Cpx9BMhq8NI40t3M4atItfHJ192B4XQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=GcfbZTTgbU0fzk+m7DOLqejre/IO+PHAtVQLLD05wEBbqN6Ix6qcG+FzaUpQM5pfi mDKkkPhL8npi39hBD9RtV4P2Bh6fD8dat3R0Jdj9CMD+ystKPFTBLNrf0fjhJ/QFoI 2PktMRB/yq3By/b9J3NHFBdeTLN7s0t2ga2MoxlwYBAupJesc9Uq/QdIEOnDPYjPbN O8oiN5MtRfZ38OTAPaTdRqtlCWJg8Fvy+xyTwyvrcLBa5BsIe5UPrFUnGKZw61Zc+j VTEideLjpP6kpWhGfV56rfzViBtrXNqsdVdYhRNruy4Kpzmf5EbaW4lH0DGkc668eW 7DdIq/vOhFwOg== Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2026 15:28:30 +0100 From: Jonathan Cameron To: jianyungao89@gmail.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dan Williams , Vishal Verma , Dave Jiang , Alison Schofield , nvdimm@lists.linux.dev (open list:DEVICE DIRECT ACCESS (DAX)), linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org (open list:DEVICE DIRECT ACCESS (DAX)) Subject: Re: [PATCH] dax: fix dax_core_init error return code Message-ID: <20261012152830.5406d532@jic23-hlaptop> In-Reply-To: <20261011132017.31131-1-jianyungao89@gmail.com> References: <20261011132017.31131-1-jianyungao89@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.4.0 (GTK 3.24.52; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sun, 11 Oct 2026 21:20:17 +0800 jianyungao89@gmail.com wrote: > From: Jianyun Gao > > dax_core_init() mistakenly returns 0 on error paths. Change the > error return to use rc so the actual error code is propagated > to the caller. What is the user visible impact of this failing? > > Fixes: 9567da0b408a ("device-dax: Introduce bus + driver model") > Signed-off-by: Jianyun Gao > --- > drivers/dax/super.c | 5 +++-- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/dax/super.c b/drivers/dax/super.c > index 45f84b0eb909..0f35f65363ee 100644 > --- a/drivers/dax/super.c > +++ b/drivers/dax/super.c > @@ -723,7 +723,7 @@ static int __init dax_core_init(void) > > rc = dax_fs_init(); > if (rc) > - return rc; > + goto err_fs; I don't see an advantage in this bit. It is a fairly common preference to error out directly where there is nothing to do. > > rc = alloc_chrdev_region(&dax_devt, 0, MINORMASK+1, "dax"); > if (rc) > @@ -738,7 +738,8 @@ static int __init dax_core_init(void) > unregister_chrdev_region(dax_devt, MINORMASK+1); > err_chrdev: > dax_fs_exit(); > - return 0; > +err_fs: > + return rc; I'm not sure about this one. Will need input from the DAX folk on whether they were deliberately eating the error return here. Not that I can immediately think of a reason to do so! Jonathan > } > > static void __exit dax_core_exit(void)