Re: [PATCH 1/3] push/pop errno in initrd read file path

[Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko]

On Friday, March 11, 2016, Josef Bacik <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 03/11/2016 02:34 PM, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> > Le ven. 11 mars 2016 19:13, Josef Bacik <address@hidden
> > <mailto:address@hidden>> a écrit :
> >
> >     On 03/11/2016 12:23 PM, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> >      >
> >      >
> >      > On Friday, March 11, 2016, Josef Bacik <address@hidden
> >     <mailto:address@hidden>
> >      > <mailto:address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>>> wrote:
> >      >
> >      >     If you try to load an initrd from http and it errors out we will
> >      >     free the initrd
> >      >     context but continue on because net_tcp_socket_close() will reset
> >      >     the grub_errno
> >      >     as will grub_initrd_close().  So we'll lose the errno and return
> >      >     GRUB_ERR_NONE
> >      >     instead of the original error.  Add push/pulls to the appropriate
> >      >     places so we
> >      >     don't lose our errno.  Thanks,
> >      >
> >      > Close functions shouldn't do this. Can you fix them instead? Also
> >     please
> >      > add [2.02] to the subjectwhen appropriate, like in this case.
> >      >
> >
> >     So do we not want close functions to do grub_error() at all?  Seems like
> >     there may be some cases where we want to know there was an error closing
> >     a tcp socket or the initrd?  Maybe not, just want to make sure before I
> >     go make these two functions void.
> >
> > How can a failure occur in close routines? What can we do with the
> > failure anyway?
>
> So sending the FIN packet for the tcp close was failing for example.  I don't think we can do anything really, I just don't like doing a patch 4 times, so I want to make sure turning these close functions into void's is ok.  Thanks,

I prefer void close functions.  Give it another day and if nobody objects by then, then it's fine for everyone.

> Josef


-- 
Regards
Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko