From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/17] fs/hpfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 20:22:01 +0800
Message-ID: <20151008122201.GA3711@bbox>
References: <1443446807-4838-1-git-send-email-bywxiaobai@163.com>
 <1443449479-5379-1-git-send-email-bywxiaobai@163.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.00.1509291702190.7735@leontynka>
 <20150930111330.GA3006@bbox>
 <alpine.DEB.2.00.1510012245420.24646@leontynka>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
To: Mikulas Patocka <mikulas@twibright.com>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1510012245420.24646@leontynka>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 10:49:41PM +0200, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wed, 30 Sep 2015, Yaowei Bai wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 05:03:24PM +0200, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> > > Hi
> > > 
> > > I suppose that you should remove the function new_valid_dev at all.
> > 
> > Yes, i thought about that, but actually there's still a user of
> > new_valid_dev in fs/stat.c:
> > 
> > 	#define valid_dev(x)  choose_32_64(old_valid_dev,new_valid_dev)(x)
> > 
> > so i just left new_valid_dev untouched and removed other users in fs first.
> 
> So, remove that too - change it to choose_32_64(old_valid_dev(x),true)
> 
> If you remove most calls for the function new_valid_dev, the function is 
> meaningless and shouldn't be present in the source code.

Sorry for delay reply. OK, i will follow your advice and send another patch to
remove it once this patchset's taken by vfs or mm tree. Thanks for reviewing.

Yaowei

> 
> Mikulas