Re: [linux-safety] [PATCH] io_uring: remove redundant assignment to ret in io_register_iowq_max_workers()
"Nghia Le" <[email protected]> Wed, 3 Nov 2021 02:14:00 +0700
| Newsgroups | tech.elisa.lists.linux-safety |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <20211102191400.d5M8RmSYBurqvU8duzurQImyVT4fwIYi5MTgKuDI_X0@z> |
On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 05:30:54PM +0100, Lukas Bulwahn wrote: > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 6:00 PM Nghia Le <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > After the assignment, no paths but only exit path 'err' using ret as > > return value. However,before going to exit path 'err', ret is changed > > as the return value of io_wq_max_workers(). Hence, the assignment is > > redundant and can be removed. > > > > Just a few comments on wording: > > After the assignment, no paths but only exit path 'err' using ret as > return value. > > -> in proper English (as far as I understand): > > Only the exit path with label 'err' uses ret as return value. > I still keep 'After the assignment' to emphasize that we don't involve the value of ret before the assignment. > --- > However, before going to exit path 'err', ret is changed as the return > value of io_wq_max_workers(). > > -> in proper English (as far as I understand): > > However, before exiting through this path with label 'err', ret is > assigned with the return value of io_wq_max_workers(). > > --- > Hence, the assignment is redundant and can be removed. > > How about? > > Hence, the initial assignment is redundant and can be removed. > > > Other than that, it looks good. How about rephrasing a bit as above > and then sending it to the authors? > > Lukas > > > Signed-off-by: Nghia Le <[email protected]> > > --- > > fs/io_uring.c | 1 - > > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c > > index acc05ff3aa19..d18f1f46ca83 100644 > > --- a/fs/io_uring.c > > +++ b/fs/io_uring.c > > @@ -10800,7 +10800,6 @@ static __cold int io_register_iowq_max_workers(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx, > > memcpy(ctx->iowq_limits, new_count, sizeof(new_count)); > > ctx->iowq_limits_set = true; > > > > - ret = -EINVAL; > > if (tctx && tctx->io_wq) { > > ret = io_wq_max_workers(tctx->io_wq, new_count); > > if (ret) > > -- > > 2.25.1 > > Thanks Lukas, I submitted patch. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#260): https://lists.elisa.tech/g/linux-safety/message/260 Mute This Topic: https://lists.elisa.tech/mt/86680054/5278000 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.elisa.tech/g/linux-safety/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-