[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100217201243.GA29576@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 15:12:43 -0500
From: David Teigland <teigland@...hat.com>
To: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>
Cc: cluster-devel@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] dlm: Remove obsolete lockspace lookup
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 09:41:35AM +0000, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> We don't need to look up the lockspace in this particular
> case since we already have a pointer to it (which was being
> dereferenced in order to do the lookup in the first place).
It'll take more to convince me that that reference from find isn't needed.
My assumption is that I added it because it was.
Dave
> Signed-off-by: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>
> ---
> fs/dlm/lockspace.c | 6 +-----
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/dlm/lockspace.c b/fs/dlm/lockspace.c
> index 26a8bd4..ce0fdf5 100644
> --- a/fs/dlm/lockspace.c
> +++ b/fs/dlm/lockspace.c
> @@ -37,10 +37,6 @@ static ssize_t dlm_control_store(struct dlm_ls *ls, const char *buf, size_t len)
> ssize_t ret = len;
> int n = simple_strtol(buf, NULL, 0);
>
> - ls = dlm_find_lockspace_local(ls->ls_local_handle);
> - if (!ls)
> - return -EINVAL;
> -
> switch (n) {
> case 0:
> dlm_ls_stop(ls);
> @@ -51,7 +47,7 @@ static ssize_t dlm_control_store(struct dlm_ls *ls, const char *buf, size_t len)
> default:
> ret = -EINVAL;
> }
> - dlm_put_lockspace(ls);
> +
> return ret;
> }
>
> --
> 1.6.2.5
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists