lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Jan]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] ext4: Remove unnecessary assignments
On Thu, Nov 04, 2021 at 06:36:37AM +0000, cgel.zte@gmail.com wrote:
> From: luo penghao <luo.penghao@zte.com.cn>
>
> The assignment at the end of the function is not necessary
>
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> index 089c958..f1258a7 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> @@ -3886,7 +3886,7 @@ void ext4_mb_mark_bb(struct super_block *sb, ext4_fsblk_t block,
> if (err)
> goto out_err;
> sync_dirty_buffer(bitmap_bh);
> - err = ext4_handle_dirty_metadata(NULL, NULL, gdp_bh);
> + ext4_handle_dirty_metadata(NULL, NULL, gdp_bh);
> sync_dirty_buffer(gdp_bh);
>
> out_err:

There's actually a bigger issue here than the Clang analyzer
complaining about the unnecessasary assignment --- and that is we
*should* be propagating the error up to ext4_mb_mark_bb's callers, and
those callers should be logging errors and potentially aborting the
fast_commit replay.

There might be some errors that can be ignored, if an idempotent
operation doesn't need to be redone. However, in cases like
ext4_handle_dirty_metadata(), or ext4_read_block_bitmap(), any
failures are probably due to something fatal happening --- either an
ENOMEM, or an I/O error, etc., and simply silently aborting the
current function without logging any kind of problem is going to make
it much harder to root cause a potential fast commit replay failure.

So what we should probably do is make ext4_mb_mark_bb return an error,
and then we'll need to look at all of the callers of ext4_mb_mark_bb,
and fix them up as necessary.

- Ted

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-01-06 00:24    [W:0.030 / U:0.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site