On Sat, Dec 03, 2016 at 06:55:16PM +0800, Pan Bian wrote: > In function btrfs_uuid_tree_iterate(), errno is assigned to variable > ret on errors. However, it directly returns 0. It may be better to > return ret. > > Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=188731 > > Signed-off-by: Pan Bian <bianpan2016@xxxxxxx> > --- > fs/btrfs/uuid-tree.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/uuid-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/uuid-tree.c > index 7fc89e4..44bcc1f 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/uuid-tree.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/uuid-tree.c > @@ -353,5 +353,5 @@ int btrfs_uuid_tree_iterate(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, > btrfs_free_path(path); > if (ret) > btrfs_warn(fs_info, "btrfs_uuid_tree_iterate failed %d", ret); > - return 0; > + return ret; This one makes sense, since the caller is checking the return value. The caller is already printing a warning, can you also get rid of the btrfs_warn(fs_info, "btrfs_uuid_tree_iterate failed %d", ret)? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
