lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Sep]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 05/17] fs/exofs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
On 09/29/2015 06:46 PM, Yaowei Bai wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 04:47:30PM +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>> On 09/28/2015 04:43 PM, Yaowei Bai wrote:
>>> As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
>>> needed, remove it.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
>>
>> ACK-by: Boaz Harrosh <ooo@electrozaur.com>
>
> Thanks.
>
>>
>> Please submit this through some General tree like the vfs or mm-tree
>
> This's my first fs-specific patch, so i think you mean i should cc vfs
> or mm-tree?
>

Yes you should ask Al (or Morton) to take the all patchset through their
tree. Then once all users of new_valid_dev() are gone it can be removed
in the one tree.

Thanks
Boaz

>>
>> Thanks
>> Boaz
>>
>>> ---
>>> fs/exofs/namei.c | 3 ---
>>> 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/exofs/namei.c b/fs/exofs/namei.c
>>> index 09a6bb1..994e078 100644
>>> --- a/fs/exofs/namei.c
>>> +++ b/fs/exofs/namei.c
>>> @@ -80,9 +80,6 @@ static int exofs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, umode_t mode,
>>> struct inode *inode;
>>> int err;
>>>
>>> - if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
>>> - return -EINVAL;
>>> -
>>> inode = exofs_new_inode(dir, mode);
>>> err = PTR_ERR(inode);
>>> if (!IS_ERR(inode)) {
>>>
>
>



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-09-30 12:41    [W:0.121 / U:0.068 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site