From 4675719d0f47d18bc13db62bd21cffd4e4ec8001 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 22:35:48 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] raid1: use an int as the return value of raise_barrier()
Git-commit: 4675719d0f47d18bc13db62bd21cffd4e4ec8001
Patch-mainline: v5.4-rc1
References: bsc#1166003
Using a sector_t as the return value is misleading, because
raise_barrier() only return 0 or -EINTR.
Also add comments for the return values of raise_barrier().
Signed-off-by: Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Coly Li <colyli@suse.de>
---
drivers/md/raid1.c | 5 ++++-
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/md/raid1.c b/drivers/md/raid1.c
index 34e26834ad28..108c75006cef 100644
--- a/drivers/md/raid1.c
+++ b/drivers/md/raid1.c
@@ -872,8 +872,11 @@ static void flush_pending_writes(struct r1conf *conf)
* backgroup IO calls must call raise_barrier. Once that returns
* there is no normal IO happeing. It must arrange to call
* lower_barrier when the particular background IO completes.
+ *
+ * If resync/recovery is interrupted, returns -EINTR;
+ * Otherwise, returns 0.
*/
-static sector_t raise_barrier(struct r1conf *conf, sector_t sector_nr)
+static int raise_barrier(struct r1conf *conf, sector_t sector_nr)
{
int idx = sector_to_idx(sector_nr);
--
2.25.0