On Mon, May 05, 2025 at 07:45:49AM +0200, hch wrote: > On Fri, May 02, 2025 at 01:06:46PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > atomic_inc(&pag_group(args->pag)->xg_active_ref); > > > item->pag = args->pag; > > > - error = xfs_mru_cache_insert(mp->m_filestream, pino, &item->mru); > > > - if (error) > > > - goto out_free_item; > > > + xfs_mru_cache_insert(mp->m_filestream, pino, &item->mru); > > > > Hmm, don't you still need to check for -ENOMEM returns? Or if truly > > none of the callers care anymore, then can we get rid of the return > > value for xfs_mru_cache_insert? > > Both for file streams and the zone association in the next patch the > mru cache is just a hint, so we ignore all errors (see the return 0 > in the error handling boilerplate in the existing code). But hardcoding > that assumption into the core mru cache helpers seems a bit weird. Ok then. The comment change in this patch is a reasonable explanation for why the return value is/has always been ignored, so Reviewed-by: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx> --D
