From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38CE27F4E for ; Tue, 27 May 2014 05:44:48 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBED9AC004 for ; Tue, 27 May 2014 03:44:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id ZOMtRiRHnRj4C8Da (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 27 May 2014 03:44:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 03:44:46 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: kill xfs_buf_geterror() Message-ID: <20140527104446.GD1440@infradead.org> References: <1400802807-19936-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1400802807-19936-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Dave Chinner Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 09:53:27AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > From: Dave Chinner > > Most of the callers are just calling ASSERT(!xfs_buf_geterror()) > which means they are checking for bp->b_error == 0. If bp is null in > this case, we will assert fail, and hence it's no different in > result to oopsing because of a null bp. In some cases, errors have > already been checked for or the function returning the buffer can't > return a buffer with an error, so it's just a redundant assert. > Either way, the assert can either be removed. > > The other two non-assert callers can just test for a buffer and > error properly. Looks good, Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs