| Message ID | 20221006224212.569555-2-gpiccoli@igalia.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Some pstore improvements | expand |
On Thu, Oct 06, 2022 at 07:42:05PM -0300, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote: > The pstore infrastructure supports one single backend at a time; > trying to load a another backend causes an error and displays a > message, introduced on commit 0d7cd09a3dbb ("pstore: Improve > register_pstore() error reporting"). > > Happens that this message is not really clear about the situation, > also the current error returned (-EPERM) isn't accurate, whereas > -EBUSY makes more sense. We have another place in the code that > relies in the -EBUSY return for a similar check. > > So, make it consistent here by returning -EBUSY and using a > similar message in both scenarios. > > Signed-off-by: Guilherme G. Piccoli <gpiccoli@igalia.com> > --- > fs/pstore/platform.c | 5 +++-- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/pstore/platform.c b/fs/pstore/platform.c > index 0c034ea39954..c32957e4b256 100644 > --- a/fs/pstore/platform.c > +++ b/fs/pstore/platform.c > @@ -562,8 +562,9 @@ static int pstore_write_user_compat(struct pstore_record *record, > int pstore_register(struct pstore_info *psi) > { > if (backend && strcmp(backend, psi->name)) { > - pr_warn("ignoring unexpected backend '%s'\n", psi->name); > - return -EPERM; > + pr_warn("backend '%s' already in use: ignoring '%s'\n", > + backend, psi->name); > + return -EBUSY; Thank you! Yes, this has bothered me for a while. :)
On 06/10/2022 20:27, Kees Cook wrote: > On Thu, Oct 06, 2022 at 07:42:05PM -0300, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote: >> The pstore infrastructure supports one single backend at a time; >> trying to load a another backend causes an error and displays a >> message, introduced on commit 0d7cd09a3dbb ("pstore: Improve >> register_pstore() error reporting"). >> >> Happens that this message is not really clear about the situation, >> also the current error returned (-EPERM) isn't accurate, whereas >> -EBUSY makes more sense. We have another place in the code that >> relies in the -EBUSY return for a similar check. >> >> So, make it consistent here by returning -EBUSY and using a >> similar message in both scenarios. >> >> Signed-off-by: Guilherme G. Piccoli <gpiccoli@igalia.com> >> --- >> fs/pstore/platform.c | 5 +++-- >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/pstore/platform.c b/fs/pstore/platform.c >> index 0c034ea39954..c32957e4b256 100644 >> --- a/fs/pstore/platform.c >> +++ b/fs/pstore/platform.c >> @@ -562,8 +562,9 @@ static int pstore_write_user_compat(struct pstore_record *record, >> int pstore_register(struct pstore_info *psi) >> { >> if (backend && strcmp(backend, psi->name)) { >> - pr_warn("ignoring unexpected backend '%s'\n", psi->name); >> - return -EPERM; >> + pr_warn("backend '%s' already in use: ignoring '%s'\n", >> + backend, psi->name); >> + return -EBUSY; > > Thank you! Yes, this has bothered me for a while. :) Heheh ditto! Thank you for the great and fast review =)
diff --git a/fs/pstore/platform.c b/fs/pstore/platform.c index 0c034ea39954..c32957e4b256 100644 --- a/fs/pstore/platform.c +++ b/fs/pstore/platform.c @@ -562,8 +562,9 @@ static int pstore_write_user_compat(struct pstore_record *record, int pstore_register(struct pstore_info *psi) { if (backend && strcmp(backend, psi->name)) { - pr_warn("ignoring unexpected backend '%s'\n", psi->name); - return -EPERM; + pr_warn("backend '%s' already in use: ignoring '%s'\n", + backend, psi->name); + return -EBUSY; } /* Sanity check flags. */
The pstore infrastructure supports one single backend at a time; trying to load a another backend causes an error and displays a message, introduced on commit 0d7cd09a3dbb ("pstore: Improve register_pstore() error reporting"). Happens that this message is not really clear about the situation, also the current error returned (-EPERM) isn't accurate, whereas -EBUSY makes more sense. We have another place in the code that relies in the -EBUSY return for a similar check. So, make it consistent here by returning -EBUSY and using a similar message in both scenarios. Signed-off-by: Guilherme G. Piccoli <gpiccoli@igalia.com> --- fs/pstore/platform.c | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)