lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Sep]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [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@imgtec.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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-09-22 23:58    [W:0.274 / U:0.300 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site