[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52660E62.9090409@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 13:34:26 +0800
From: Gu Zheng <guz.fnst@...fujitsu.com>
To: Haicheng Li <haicheng.li@...ux.intel.com>
CC: Gao feng <gaofeng@...fujitsu.com>, Kim <jaegeuk.kim@...sung.com>,
f2fs <linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] f2fs: introduce f2fs_kmem_cache_alloc to hide the unfailed
kmem cache allocation
On 10/22/2013 01:16 PM, Haicheng Li wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 11:49:58AM +0800, Gao feng wrote:
>> On 10/21/2013 03:24 PM, Gu Zheng wrote:
>>> +static inline void *f2fs_kmem_cache_alloc(struct kmem_cache *cachep,
>>> + gfp_t flags)
>>> +{
>>> + void *entry = kmem_cache_alloc(cachep, flags);
>>> +retry:
>>
>> retry after kmem_cache_alloc?
>
> Good catch.
>
> Sorry for the carelessness in my previous review.
> Besides this, I also found another issue as below:
>
>> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 03:24:55PM +0800, Gu Zheng wrote:
>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/node.c b/fs/f2fs/node.c
>>> index ef80f79..fe3cf8e 100644
>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/node.c
>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/node.c
>>> @@ -1308,11 +1308,7 @@ static int add_free_nid(struct f2fs_nm_info *nm_i, nid_t nid, bool build)
>>> if (allocated)
>>> return 0;
>>> retry:
> -retry?
Can be removed here, this tag still used by front goto jumping. But it
seems that we need to use another suitable name rather than "retry".
Regards,
Gu
>
>
--
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