[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <96008557-8ff4-44cc-b5e3-ce242212f1a3@stanley.mountain>
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 22:43:44 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] ext4: cleanup variable name in ext4_fc_del()
The variables "&EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb)->s_fc_lock" and "&sbi->s_fc_lock"
are the same lock. This function uses a mix of both, which is a bit
unsightly and confuses Smatch.
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
---
fs/ext4/fast_commit.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/ext4/fast_commit.c b/fs/ext4/fast_commit.c
index b33664f6ce2a..e4cb1356e9b6 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/fast_commit.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/fast_commit.c
@@ -291,9 +291,9 @@ void ext4_fc_del(struct inode *inode)
return;
restart:
- spin_lock(&EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb)->s_fc_lock);
+ spin_lock(&sbi->s_fc_lock);
if (list_empty(&ei->i_fc_list) && list_empty(&ei->i_fc_dilist)) {
- spin_unlock(&EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb)->s_fc_lock);
+ spin_unlock(&sbi->s_fc_lock);
return;
}
--
2.45.2
Powered by blists - more mailing lists