[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160921083915.GH3075@imgtec.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2016 09:39:15 +0100
From: Eric Engestrom <eric.engestrom@...tec.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] debugfs: remove unused variable
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 10:01:11AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 05:17:15PM +0100, Eric Engestrom wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom <eric.engestrom@...tec.com>
> > ---
> > fs/debugfs/file.c | 3 +--
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/debugfs/file.c b/fs/debugfs/file.c
> > index 592059f..04eca0b 100644
> > --- a/fs/debugfs/file.c
> > +++ b/fs/debugfs/file.c
> > @@ -195,7 +195,6 @@ static int full_proxy_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
> > const struct dentry *dentry = F_DENTRY(filp);
> > const struct file_operations *real_fops = REAL_FOPS_DEREF(dentry);
> > const struct file_operations *proxy_fops = filp->f_op;
> > - int r = 0;
> >
> > /*
> > * We must not protect this against removal races here: the
> > @@ -204,7 +203,7 @@ static int full_proxy_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
> > * ->i_private is still being meaningful here.
> > */
> > if (real_fops->release)
> > - r = real_fops->release(inode, filp);
> > + real_fops->release(inode, filp);
>
> Hm, shouldn't we be propagating the result back up the call chain?
You're right, sorry, I wasn't thinking. Correct fix incoming :)
Cheers,
Eric
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists