xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [patch] xfs: remove an unneeded NULL check

To: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [patch] xfs: remove an unneeded NULL check
From: Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 17:08:56 -0600
Cc: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>, xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx, Alex Elder <elder@xxxxxxxxxx>, kernel-janitors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20120131225601.GQ9090@dastard>
References: <20120128105501.GB25092@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20120131225601.GQ9090@dastard>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 09:56:01AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 01:55:01PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > Smatch complains because we check "commit_lsn" for NULL inconsistently.
> > fs/xfs/xfs_log_cil.c +705 xfs_log_commit_cil(43) error: we previously
> >     assumed 'commit_lsn' could be null (see line 688)
> > xfs_log_commit_cil() is only called from one place, and "commit_lsn" is
> > a valid pointer, so I've removed the NULL check.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_log_cil.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_log_cil.c
> > index d4fadbe..d9c4652 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_log_cil.c
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_log_cil.c
> > @@ -685,8 +685,7 @@ xfs_log_commit_cil(
> >  
> >     /* lock out background commit */
> >     down_read(&log->l_cilp->xc_ctx_lock);
> > -   if (commit_lsn)
> > -           *commit_lsn = log->l_cilp->xc_ctx->sequence;
> > +   *commit_lsn = log->l_cilp->xc_ctx->sequence;
> >  
> >     xlog_cil_insert_items(log, log_vector, tp->t_ticket);
> 
> There's a set of reviewed patches (for 3.3) that change all this
> code. The null check might still be there, but that needs to be
> checked.
> 
> On that note, Ben, can you get all of the reviewed patches that are
> currently outstanding into the for-next branch of the oss tree? We
> need this done sooner rather than later so that all our current
> testing during development is done with those patches applied. it
> also helps us to avoid conflicts between patchsets that touch the
> same code (which I have quite a few of at the moment)....

I'll have it resolved ASAP.

-Ben

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>