lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Dec]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 3/4] staging: lustre: Less checks in mgc_process_recover_log() after error detection
    On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 03:48:57PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
    >
    > That's 6 different things, shouldn't this be 6 different patches?
    >

    Not really. The patch could be described as just "change from using one
    exit label to using several." Markus has sent a number of these patches
    and I am CC'd on them because of kernel-janitors, it's really painful to
    review when he breaks them up into tiny patches where he changes one
    label at a time. It's like trying to put coleslaw back together into a
    head of cabbage.

    > On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 08:12:12PM +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
    > > From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
    > > Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 18:58:51 +0100
    > >
    > > A few checks would be performed by the mgc_process_recover_log() function
    > > even though it was determined that the passed variable "pages" contained
    > > a null pointer or a call of the alloc_page() function failed.
    > >
    > > 1. Let us return directly if a call of the kcalloc() function failed.
    > >
    > > 2. Corresponding implementation details could be improved by adjustments
    > > for jump targets according to the Linux coding style convention.
    > >
    > > 3. Delete sanity checks then.

    These are not sanity checks, of course. They were required because of a
    common exit path.

    > >
    > > 4. Move an assignment for the variable "eof" behind memory allocations.

    I had asked Markus not to do this. It is unrelated.

    > >
    > > 5. The variable "req" will eventually be set to an appropriate pointer
    > > from a call of the ptlrpc_request_alloc() function.
    > > Thus let us omit the explicit initialisation before.

    Now that we use multiple labels it isn't necessary to initialize "req".

    > >
    > > 6. Apply a recommendation from the script "checkpatch.pl".

    This is where he changed pages[i] == NULL to !(pages[i]). It's not
    strictly related but it's minor and he was changing those lines anyway.

    regards,
    dan carpenter


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2015-12-22 09:21    [W:4.079 / U:0.132 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site