From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.29]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CF0C7CB7 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2016 06:08:27 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E501F304032 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2016 04:08:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id Fp9Y418dBjsWaGnl (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 04:08:21 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 04:08:14 -0800 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: remove impossible condition Message-ID: <20160301120814.GA5217@infradead.org> References: <1456404237-18169-1-git-send-email-luisbg@osg.samsung.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1456404237-18169-1-git-send-email-luisbg@osg.samsung.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: Luis de Bethencourt Cc: cmaiolino@redhat.com, darrick.wong@oracle.com, namjae.jeon@samsung.com, bfoster@redhat.com, sandeen@sandeen.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com, billodo@redhat.com On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:43:57PM +0000, Luis de Bethencourt wrote: > bp_release is set to 0 just before the breakpoint of the for loop before > the conditional check (in line 458). The other breakpoint is a goto that > skips the dead code. Yes, this looks correct: Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig The whole code around this is rather grotty and could use some more work, though.. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs