From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Chandan Babu R <chandan.babu@oracle.com>,
Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/10] xfs: don't bother returning errors from xfs_file_release
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2024 08:39:51 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240624153951.GH3058325@frogsfrogsfrogs> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240623053532.857496-5-hch@lst.de>
On Sun, Jun 23, 2024 at 07:34:49AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> While ->release returns int, the only caller ignores the return value.
> As we're only doing cleanup work there isn't much of a point in
> return a value to start with, so just document the situation instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> ---
> fs/xfs/xfs_file.c | 18 +++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
> index d39d0ea522d1c2..7b91cbab80da55 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
> @@ -1186,6 +1186,10 @@ xfs_dir_open(
> return error;
> }
>
> +/*
> + * Don't bother propagating errors. We're just doing cleanup, and the caller
> + * ignores the return value anyway.
Shouldn't we drop the int return from the function declaration, then?
(Is that also a cleanup that's you're working on?)
--D
> + */
> STATIC int
> xfs_file_release(
> struct inode *inode,
> @@ -1193,7 +1197,6 @@ xfs_file_release(
> {
> struct xfs_inode *ip = XFS_I(inode);
> struct xfs_mount *mp = ip->i_mount;
> - int error;
>
> /* If this is a read-only mount, don't generate I/O */
> if (xfs_is_readonly(mp))
> @@ -1211,11 +1214,8 @@ xfs_file_release(
> if (!xfs_is_shutdown(mp) &&
> xfs_iflags_test_and_clear(ip, XFS_ITRUNCATED)) {
> xfs_iflags_clear(ip, XFS_IDIRTY_RELEASE);
> - if (ip->i_delayed_blks > 0) {
> - error = filemap_flush(inode->i_mapping);
> - if (error)
> - return error;
> - }
> + if (ip->i_delayed_blks > 0)
> + filemap_flush(inode->i_mapping);
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -1249,14 +1249,14 @@ xfs_file_release(
> * dirty close we will still remove the speculative
> * allocation, but after that we will leave it in place.
> */
> - error = xfs_free_eofblocks(ip);
> - if (!error && ip->i_delayed_blks)
> + xfs_free_eofblocks(ip);
> + if (ip->i_delayed_blks)
> xfs_iflags_set(ip, XFS_IDIRTY_RELEASE);
> }
> xfs_iunlock(ip, XFS_IOLOCK_EXCL);
> }
>
> - return error;
> + return 0;
> }
>
> STATIC int
> --
> 2.43.0
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-24 15:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-23 5:34 post-EOF block handling revamp Christoph Hellwig
2024-06-23 5:34 ` [PATCH 01/10] xfs: fix freeing speculative preallocations for preallocated files Christoph Hellwig
2024-06-24 15:30 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-06-23 5:34 ` [PATCH 02/10] xfs: remove the i_mode check in xfs_release Christoph Hellwig
2024-06-24 15:34 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-06-24 15:50 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-08-07 15:01 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-06-23 5:34 ` [PATCH 03/10] xfs: refactor f_op->release handling Christoph Hellwig
2024-06-24 15:35 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-06-23 5:34 ` [PATCH 04/10] xfs: don't bother returning errors from xfs_file_release Christoph Hellwig
2024-06-24 15:39 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2024-06-24 15:51 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-08-07 14:59 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-06-23 5:34 ` [PATCH 05/10] xfs: skip all of xfs_file_release when shut down Christoph Hellwig
2024-06-24 15:41 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-06-23 5:34 ` [PATCH 06/10] xfs: don't free post-EOF blocks on read close Christoph Hellwig
2024-06-24 15:43 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-06-23 5:34 ` [PATCH 07/10] xfs: only free posteof blocks on first close Christoph Hellwig
2024-06-24 15:46 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-06-24 16:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-06-24 16:49 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-06-23 5:34 ` [PATCH 08/10] xfs: check XFS_IDIRTY_RELEASE earlier in xfs_release_eofblocks Christoph Hellwig
2024-06-24 15:50 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-06-24 15:54 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-06-23 5:34 ` [PATCH 09/10] xfs: simplify extent lookup in xfs_can_free_eofblocks Christoph Hellwig
2024-06-24 15:51 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-06-23 5:34 ` [PATCH 10/10] xfs: reclaim speculative preallocations for append only files Christoph Hellwig
2024-06-24 15:54 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-06-24 16:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-06-24 17:06 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-06-24 17:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-06-24 18:44 ` Darrick J. Wong
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=20240624153951.GH3058325@frogsfrogsfrogs \
--to=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=chandan.babu@oracle.com \
--cc=dchinner@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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