| Message ID | 20191101114054.50225-1-maowenan@huawei.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [-next] nfsd: Drop LIST_HEAD where the variable it declares is never used. | expand |
Hi Mao- > On Nov 1, 2019, at 7:40 AM, Mao Wenan <maowenan@huawei.com> wrote: > > The declarations were introduced with the file, but the declared > variables were not used. > > Fixes: 65294c1f2c5e ("nfsd: add a new struct file caching facility to nfsd") I'm not sure a Fixes: tag is necessary here? 65294c1f2c5e works fine without this change, and it's not something we would need to backport into stable kernels. This is more of a clean up patch. > Signed-off-by: Mao Wenan <maowenan@huawei.com> > --- > fs/nfsd/filecache.c | 2 -- > 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/nfsd/filecache.c b/fs/nfsd/filecache.c > index ef55e9b..32a9bf2 100644 > --- a/fs/nfsd/filecache.c > +++ b/fs/nfsd/filecache.c > @@ -685,8 +685,6 @@ nfsd_file_cache_purge(struct net *net) > void > nfsd_file_cache_shutdown(void) > { > - LIST_HEAD(dispose); > - > set_bit(NFSD_FILE_SHUTDOWN, &nfsd_file_lru_flags); > > lease_unregister_notifier(&nfsd_file_lease_notifier); > -- > 2.7.4 > -- Chuck Lever
On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 09:36:27AM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: > Hi Mao- > > > On Nov 1, 2019, at 7:40 AM, Mao Wenan <maowenan@huawei.com> wrote: > > > > The declarations were introduced with the file, but the declared > > variables were not used. > > > > Fixes: 65294c1f2c5e ("nfsd: add a new struct file caching facility to nfsd") > > I'm not sure a Fixes: tag is necessary here? 65294c1f2c5e > works fine without this change, and it's not something we > would need to backport into stable kernels. > > This is more of a clean up patch. > Fixes is not really related to backports or stable. I would agree that this isn't a bug but just a cleanup, but the problem is that other people want Fixes tags for everything... Yesterday I sent a cleanup patch and I almost put the Fixes tag under the --- cut off but in the end I just deleted it... It's hard to know what the right thing is. regards, dan carpenter
On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 05:49:21PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 09:36:27AM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: > > > On Nov 1, 2019, at 7:40 AM, Mao Wenan <maowenan@huawei.com> wrote: > > > > > > The declarations were introduced with the file, but the declared > > > variables were not used. > > > > > > Fixes: 65294c1f2c5e ("nfsd: add a new struct file caching facility to nfsd") Thanks, applying for 5.5. > > I'm not sure a Fixes: tag is necessary here? 65294c1f2c5e > > works fine without this change, and it's not something we > > would need to backport into stable kernels. > > > > This is more of a clean up patch. > > > > Fixes is not really related to backports or stable. I would agree that > this isn't a bug but just a cleanup, but the problem is that other > people want Fixes tags for everything... > > Yesterday I sent a cleanup patch and I almost put the Fixes tag under > the --- cut off but in the end I just deleted it... It's hard to know > what the right thing is. It doesn't have a stable cc and it's pretty obvious cleanup, so I guess there's no harm in it. I could go either way. But I'll leave the patch as is unless someone comes up with a clear policy. --b.
diff --git a/fs/nfsd/filecache.c b/fs/nfsd/filecache.c index ef55e9b..32a9bf2 100644 --- a/fs/nfsd/filecache.c +++ b/fs/nfsd/filecache.c @@ -685,8 +685,6 @@ nfsd_file_cache_purge(struct net *net) void nfsd_file_cache_shutdown(void) { - LIST_HEAD(dispose); - set_bit(NFSD_FILE_SHUTDOWN, &nfsd_file_lru_flags); lease_unregister_notifier(&nfsd_file_lease_notifier);
The declarations were introduced with the file, but the declared variables were not used. Fixes: 65294c1f2c5e ("nfsd: add a new struct file caching facility to nfsd") Signed-off-by: Mao Wenan <maowenan@huawei.com> --- fs/nfsd/filecache.c | 2 -- 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)