| Message ID | 20191005051736.29857-1-cgxu519@mykernel.net (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [1/3] btrfs: remove unnecessary hash_init() | expand |
On Sat, Oct 05, 2019 at 01:17:34PM +0800, Chengguang Xu wrote: > hash_init() is not necessary in btrfs_props_init(), > so remove it. The part that explains why it's not necessary is missing in the changelo. And looking what hash_init and plain DEFINE_HASHTABLE does I don't think that removing hash_init is safe or making the code more clear.
---- 在 星期一, 2019-10-07 23:44:45 David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz> 撰写 ---- > On Sat, Oct 05, 2019 at 01:17:34PM +0800, Chengguang Xu wrote: > > hash_init() is not necessary in btrfs_props_init(), > > so remove it. > > The part that explains why it's not necessary is missing in the > changelo. And looking what hash_init and plain DEFINE_HASHTABLE does I > don't think that removing hash_init is safe or making the code more > clear. Sorry for pool explanation in change log. Look into the code, DEFINE_HASHTABLE has already included initialization code in it and I think this is the main difference compare to DECLARE_HASHTABLE which still needs hash_init. Thanks, Chengguang
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/props.c b/fs/btrfs/props.c index 1e664e0b59b8..68508db3dc65 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/props.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/props.c @@ -437,8 +437,6 @@ void __init btrfs_props_init(void) { int i; - hash_init(prop_handlers_ht); - for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(prop_handlers); i++) { struct prop_handler *p = &prop_handlers[i]; u64 h = btrfs_name_hash(p->xattr_name, strlen(p->xattr_name));
hash_init() is not necessary in btrfs_props_init(), so remove it. Signed-off-by: Chengguang Xu <cgxu519@mykernel.net> --- fs/btrfs/props.c | 2 -- 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)