From f2992db2a4f7ae10f61d5bc68c7c1528cec639e2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org> Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 01:46:55 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] Mark res_counter_charge(_locked) with __must_check Ignoring their return values may result in counter underflow in the future - when the value charged will be uncharged (or in "leaks" - when the value is not uncharged). This also prevents from using charging routines to decrement the counter value (i.e. uncharge it) ;) (Current code works OK with res_counter, however :) ) Signed-off-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org> Cc: Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Paul Menage <menage@google.com> Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> --- include/linux/res_counter.h | 6 ++++-- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/linux/res_counter.h b/include/linux/res_counter.h index 6d9e1fca098..125660e7793 100644 --- a/include/linux/res_counter.h +++ b/include/linux/res_counter.h @@ -95,8 +95,10 @@ void res_counter_init(struct res_counter *counter); * counter->limit _locked call expects the counter->lock to be taken */ -int res_counter_charge_locked(struct res_counter *counter, unsigned long val); -int res_counter_charge(struct res_counter *counter, unsigned long val); +int __must_check res_counter_charge_locked(struct res_counter *counter, + unsigned long val); +int __must_check res_counter_charge(struct res_counter *counter, + unsigned long val); /* * uncharge - tell that some portion of the resource is released -- 2.41.3