[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a1a68d9a887148ae9a80ca103d112e6b@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2020 09:52:38 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: 'Luis Henriques' <lhenriques@...e.de>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@...il.com>
CC: "ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org" <ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] ceph: remove unnecessary return in switch statement
From: Luis Henriques
> Sent: 14 August 2020 10:38
>
> Since there's a return immediately after the 'break', there's no need for
> this extra 'return' in the S_IFDIR case.
>
> Signed-off-by: Luis Henriques <lhenriques@...e.de>
> ---
> fs/ceph/file.c | 2 --
> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ceph/file.c b/fs/ceph/file.c
> index d51c3f2fdca0..04ab99c0223a 100644
> --- a/fs/ceph/file.c
> +++ b/fs/ceph/file.c
> @@ -256,8 +256,6 @@ static int ceph_init_file(struct inode *inode, struct file *file, int fmode)
> case S_IFDIR:
> ret = ceph_init_file_info(inode, file, fmode,
> S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode));
> - if (ret)
> - return ret;
> break;
>
> case S_IFLNK:
I'd move the other way and just do:
return ceph_init_file_info(...);
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists