linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/9] staging: lustre: ldlm: remove unneeded 'err' arg to ldlm_process_flock

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <848A263F-507D-4931-A6A0-F16709C05A30@intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 27 Oct 2017 09:11:55 +0000
From:   "Dilger, Andreas" <andreas.dilger@...el.com>
To:     NeilBrown <neilb@...e.com>
CC:     "Drokin, Oleg" <oleg.drokin@...el.com>,
        James Simmons <jsimmons@...radead.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org" <lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] staging: lustre: ldlm: remove unneeded 'err' arg to
 ldlm_process_flock_lock()

On Oct 22, 2017, at 18:53, NeilBrown <neilb@...e.com> wrote:
> 
> This arg is used to return an error code, but the returned code is never
> looked at.  So there is no point returning it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.com>

Reviewed-by: Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@...el.com>

> ---
> drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c |   10 ++--------
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c
> index 766653b4d8a5..05e6b67b0e72 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c
> @@ -122,8 +122,7 @@ ldlm_flock_destroy(struct ldlm_lock *lock, enum ldlm_mode mode, __u64 flags)
>  * is released.
>  *
>  */
> -static int ldlm_process_flock_lock(struct ldlm_lock *req, __u64 *flags,
> -				   enum ldlm_error *err)
> +static int ldlm_process_flock_lock(struct ldlm_lock *req, __u64 *flags)
> {
> 	struct ldlm_resource *res = req->l_resource;
> 	struct ldlm_namespace *ns = ldlm_res_to_ns(res);
> @@ -145,8 +144,6 @@ static int ldlm_process_flock_lock(struct ldlm_lock *req, __u64 *flags,
> 	       req->l_policy_data.l_flock.start,
> 	       req->l_policy_data.l_flock.end);
> 
> -	*err = ELDLM_OK;
> -
> 	/* No blocking ASTs are sent to the clients for
> 	 * Posix file & record locks
> 	 */
> @@ -192,7 +189,6 @@ static int ldlm_process_flock_lock(struct ldlm_lock *req, __u64 *flags,
> 
> 			if (*flags & LDLM_FL_BLOCK_NOWAIT) {
> 				ldlm_flock_destroy(req, mode, *flags);
> -				*err = -EAGAIN;
> 				return LDLM_ITER_STOP;
> 			}
> 
> @@ -330,7 +326,6 @@ static int ldlm_process_flock_lock(struct ldlm_lock *req, __u64 *flags,
> 			if (IS_ERR(new2)) {
> 				ldlm_flock_destroy(req, lock->l_granted_mode,
> 						   *flags);
> -				*err = PTR_ERR(new2);
> 				return LDLM_ITER_STOP;
> 			}
> 			goto reprocess;
> @@ -440,7 +435,6 @@ ldlm_flock_completion_ast(struct ldlm_lock *lock, __u64 flags, void *data)
> 	struct obd_import	      *imp = NULL;
> 	struct ldlm_flock_wait_data     fwd;
> 	struct l_wait_info	      lwi;
> -	enum ldlm_error		    err;
> 	int			     rc = 0;
> 
> 	OBD_FAIL_TIMEOUT(OBD_FAIL_LDLM_CP_CB_WAIT2, 4);
> @@ -593,7 +587,7 @@ ldlm_flock_completion_ast(struct ldlm_lock *lock, __u64 flags, void *data)
> 		/* We need to reprocess the lock to do merges or splits
> 		 * with existing locks owned by this process.
> 		 */
> -		ldlm_process_flock_lock(lock, &noreproc, &err);
> +		ldlm_process_flock_lock(lock, &noreproc);
> 	}
> 	unlock_res_and_lock(lock);
> 	return rc;
> 
> 

Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Lustre Principal Architect
Intel Corporation