From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To: chaoting fan <tingchaofan@gmail.com>
Cc: "Myklebust, Trond" <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sunrpc: the cache_detail in cache_is_valid is unused any more
Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 09:48:09 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130515134809.GG16811@fieldses.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK1jPnK_WHHH3cgnocQKgMDzcQOEn4Edc-MyaV8OwWLpBMQz3g@mail.gmail.com>
I think this never got applied? Applying for 3.11.--b.
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 10:19:45PM +0800, chaoting fan wrote:
> > Why not just remove it altogether? There are only 3 callers.
>
> thanks ,here is the change patch.
>
> the cache_detail(*detail) in function cache_is_valid is unused any more.
>
> Signed-off-by: fanchaoting <fanchaoting@cn.fujitsu.com>
>
> ---
> net/sunrpc/cache.c | 8 ++++----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/sunrpc/cache.c b/net/sunrpc/cache.c
> index 9afa439..adbbc19 100644
> --- a/net/sunrpc/cache.c
> +++ b/net/sunrpc/cache.c
> @@ -201,7 +201,7 @@ static int cache_make_upcall(struct cache_detail
> *cd, struct cache_head *h)
> return cd->cache_upcall(cd, h);
> }
>
> -static inline int cache_is_valid(struct cache_detail *detail, struct
> cache_head *h)
> +static inline int cache_is_valid(struct cache_head *h)
> {
> if (!test_bit(CACHE_VALID, &h->flags))
> return -EAGAIN;
> @@ -227,7 +227,7 @@ static int try_to_negate_entry(struct cache_detail
> *detail, struct cache_head *h
> int rv;
>
> write_lock(&detail->hash_lock);
> - rv = cache_is_valid(detail, h);
> + rv = cache_is_valid(h);
> if (rv != -EAGAIN) {
> write_unlock(&detail->hash_lock);
> return rv;
> @@ -260,7 +260,7 @@ int cache_check(struct cache_detail *detail,
> long refresh_age, age;
>
> /* First decide return status as best we can */
> - rv = cache_is_valid(detail, h);
> + rv = cache_is_valid(h);
>
> /* now see if we want to start an upcall */
> refresh_age = (h->expiry_time - h->last_refresh);
> @@ -293,7 +293,7 @@ int cache_check(struct cache_detail *detail,
> * Request was not deferred; handle it as best
> * we can ourselves:
> */
> - rv = cache_is_valid(detail, h);
> + rv = cache_is_valid(h);
> if (rv == -EAGAIN)
> rv = -ETIMEDOUT;
> }
> --
> 1.7.10.4
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-15 13:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-28 13:53 [PATCH] sunrpc: the cache_detail in cache_is_valid is unused any more chaoting fan
2013-03-28 13:58 ` Myklebust, Trond
2013-03-28 14:07 ` chaoting fan
2013-03-28 14:19 ` chaoting fan
2013-05-15 13:48 ` J. Bruce Fields [this message]
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=20130515134809.GG16811@fieldses.org \
--to=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tingchaofan@gmail.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox