From: Guoqing Jiang <gqJiang@suse.com>
To: cluster-devel.redhat.com
Subject: [Cluster-devel] [PATCH] dlm: remove unnecessary error check
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 10:39:16 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5578F4D4.2080308@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <510231821.14079509.1433939161255.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
Bob Peterson wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> We don't need the redundant logic since send_message always returns 0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Guoqing Jiang <gqjiang@suse.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> fs/dlm/lock.c | 10 ++--------
>>>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/dlm/lock.c b/fs/dlm/lock.c
>>>>>> index 35502d4..6fc3de9 100644
>>>>>> --- a/fs/dlm/lock.c
>>>>>> +++ b/fs/dlm/lock.c
>>>>>> @@ -3656,10 +3656,7 @@ static int send_common(struct dlm_rsb *r, struct
>>>>>> dlm_lkb *lkb, int mstype)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> send_args(r, lkb, ms);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - error = send_message(mh, ms);
>>>>>> - if (error)
>>>>>> - goto fail;
>>>>>> - return 0;
>>>>>> + return send_message(mh, ms);
>>>>>>
>
> Hi Guoqing,
>
> Sorry, I was momentarily confused. I think you misunderstood what I was saying.
> What I meant was: Instead of doing:
>
> + return send_message(mh, ms);
> ...where send_message returns 0, it might be better to have:
>
> static void send_message(struct dlm_mhandle *mh, struct dlm_message *ms)
> {
> dlm_message_out(ms);
> dlm_lowcomms_commit_buffer(mh);
> }
>
> ...And in send_common, do (in both places):
> + send_message(mh, ms);
> + return 0;
>
> Since it's so short, it might even be better to code send_message as a macro,
> or at least an "inline" function.
>
>
Hi Bob,
Got it, thanks. It is a better solution but it is not a bug fix or
similar thing, so maybe just leave it as it is.
Regards,
Guoqing
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Guoqing Jiang <gqJiang@suse.com>
To: Bob Peterson <rpeterso@redhat.com>
Cc: ccaulfie@redhat.com, teigland@redhat.com,
cluster-devel@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Cluster-devel] [PATCH] dlm: remove unnecessary error check
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 10:39:16 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5578F4D4.2080308@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <510231821.14079509.1433939161255.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
Bob Peterson wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> We don't need the redundant logic since send_message always returns 0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Guoqing Jiang <gqjiang@suse.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> fs/dlm/lock.c | 10 ++--------
>>>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/dlm/lock.c b/fs/dlm/lock.c
>>>>>> index 35502d4..6fc3de9 100644
>>>>>> --- a/fs/dlm/lock.c
>>>>>> +++ b/fs/dlm/lock.c
>>>>>> @@ -3656,10 +3656,7 @@ static int send_common(struct dlm_rsb *r, struct
>>>>>> dlm_lkb *lkb, int mstype)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> send_args(r, lkb, ms);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - error = send_message(mh, ms);
>>>>>> - if (error)
>>>>>> - goto fail;
>>>>>> - return 0;
>>>>>> + return send_message(mh, ms);
>>>>>>
>
> Hi Guoqing,
>
> Sorry, I was momentarily confused. I think you misunderstood what I was saying.
> What I meant was: Instead of doing:
>
> + return send_message(mh, ms);
> ...where send_message returns 0, it might be better to have:
>
> static void send_message(struct dlm_mhandle *mh, struct dlm_message *ms)
> {
> dlm_message_out(ms);
> dlm_lowcomms_commit_buffer(mh);
> }
>
> ...And in send_common, do (in both places):
> + send_message(mh, ms);
> + return 0;
>
> Since it's so short, it might even be better to code send_message as a macro,
> or at least an "inline" function.
>
>
Hi Bob,
Got it, thanks. It is a better solution but it is not a bug fix or
similar thing, so maybe just leave it as it is.
Regards,
Guoqing
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-11 2:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-09 9:46 [Cluster-devel] [PATCH] dlm: remove unnecessary error check Guoqing Jiang
2015-06-09 9:46 ` Guoqing Jiang
2015-06-09 12:09 ` [Cluster-devel] " Bob Peterson
2015-06-09 12:09 ` Bob Peterson
2015-06-10 2:39 ` Guoqing Jiang
2015-06-10 2:39 ` Guoqing Jiang
2015-06-10 2:50 ` Bob Peterson
2015-06-10 2:50 ` Bob Peterson
2015-06-10 3:10 ` Guoqing Jiang
2015-06-10 3:10 ` Guoqing Jiang
2015-06-10 12:26 ` Bob Peterson
2015-06-10 12:26 ` Bob Peterson
2015-06-11 2:39 ` Guoqing Jiang [this message]
2015-06-11 2:39 ` Guoqing Jiang
2015-06-10 15:24 ` David Teigland
2015-06-10 15:24 ` David Teigland
2015-06-11 9:47 ` Guoqing Jiang
2015-06-11 9:47 ` Guoqing Jiang
2015-06-11 16:18 ` David Teigland
2015-06-11 16:18 ` David Teigland
2015-06-17 2:14 ` Guoqing Jiang
2015-06-17 2:14 ` Guoqing Jiang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5578F4D4.2080308@suse.com \
--to=gqjiang@suse.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.