Re: [PATCH 34/40] atm: simplify procfs code

Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]> writes:

> On Sat, May 05, 2018 at 07:51:18AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]> writes:
>> 
>> > Use remove_proc_subtree to remove the whole subtree on cleanup, and
>> > unwind the registration loop into individual calls.  Switch to use
>> > proc_create_seq where applicable.
>> 
>> Can you please explain why you are removing the error handling when
>> you are unwinding the registration loop?
>
> Because there is no point in handling these errors.  The code work
> perfectly fine without procfs, or without given proc files and the
> removal works just fine if they don't exist either.  This is a very
> common patter in various parts of the kernel already.
>
> I'll document it better in the changelog.

Thank you.  That is the kind of thing that could be a signal of
inattentiveness and problems, especially when it is not documented.

Eric


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot