[PATCH 00/17] cleanups of fs about new/huge_valid_dev

[PATCH 00/17] cleanups of fs about new/huge_valid_dev

[Yaowei Bai]

This patchset is mainly doing some cleanups about new/huge_valid_dev
functions, details are below:

 - (patch 1): remove unused huge_valid_dev function
 - (patch 2): make old/new_valid_dev return bool
 - (patch 3-17): remove unneed new_valid_dev check in fs

Yaowei Bai (17):
  fs/kdev_t: remove unused huge_valid_dev function
  fs/kdev_t: old/new_valid_dev can be boolean
  fs/vfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
  fs/btrfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
  fs/exofs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
  fs/ext2: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
  fs/ext4: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
  fs/f2fs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
  fs/hpfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
  fs/jffs2: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
  fs/jfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
  fs/ncpfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
  fs/nfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
  fs/nilfs2: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
  fs/reiserfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
  fs/stat: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
  fs/ubifs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

 fs/9p/vfs_inode.c      | 3 ---
 fs/9p/vfs_inode_dotl.c | 3 ---
 fs/btrfs/inode.c       | 3 ---
 fs/exofs/namei.c       | 3 ---
 fs/ext2/namei.c        | 3 ---
 fs/ext4/namei.c        | 3 ---
 fs/f2fs/namei.c        | 3 ---
 fs/hpfs/namei.c        | 2 --
 fs/jffs2/dir.c         | 3 ---
 fs/jfs/namei.c         | 3 ---
 fs/jfs/super.c         | 3 ---
 fs/ncpfs/dir.c         | 2 --
 fs/nfs/dir.c           | 3 ---
 fs/nilfs2/namei.c      | 3 ---
 fs/reiserfs/namei.c    | 3 ---
 fs/stat.c              | 2 --
 fs/ubifs/dir.c         | 3 ---
 fs/ubifs/misc.h        | 9 ++-------
 include/linux/kdev_t.h | 9 ++-------
 19 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 62 deletions(-)

-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH 01/17] fs/kdev_t: remove unused huge_valid_dev function

[Yaowei Bai]

There's no user of huge_valid_dev function anymore, so remove it.

No functional change.

Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
---
 include/linux/kdev_t.h | 5 -----
 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/kdev_t.h b/include/linux/kdev_t.h
index c838abe..a546d20 100644
--- a/include/linux/kdev_t.h
+++ b/include/linux/kdev_t.h
@@ -54,11 +54,6 @@ static inline dev_t new_decode_dev(u32 dev)
 	return MKDEV(major, minor);
 }
 
-static inline int huge_valid_dev(dev_t dev)
-{
-	return 1;
-}
-
 static inline u64 huge_encode_dev(dev_t dev)
 {
 	return new_encode_dev(dev);
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH 02/17] fs/kdev_t: old/new_valid_dev can be boolean

[Yaowei Bai]

This patch makes old/new_valid_dev return bool due to these two
particular functions only using either one or zero as their return
value.

No functional change.

Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
---
 include/linux/kdev_t.h | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/kdev_t.h b/include/linux/kdev_t.h
index a546d20..052c7b3 100644
--- a/include/linux/kdev_t.h
+++ b/include/linux/kdev_t.h
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@
 	})
 
 /* acceptable for old filesystems */
-static inline int old_valid_dev(dev_t dev)
+static inline bool old_valid_dev(dev_t dev)
 {
 	return MAJOR(dev) < 256 && MINOR(dev) < 256;
 }
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ static inline dev_t old_decode_dev(u16 val)
 	return MKDEV((val >> 8) & 255, val & 255);
 }
 
-static inline int new_valid_dev(dev_t dev)
+static inline bool new_valid_dev(dev_t dev)
 {
 	return 1;
 }
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH 03/17] fs/vfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Yaowei Bai]

As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
needed, remove it.

Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
---
 fs/9p/vfs_inode.c      | 3 ---
 fs/9p/vfs_inode_dotl.c | 3 ---
 2 files changed, 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/9p/vfs_inode.c b/fs/9p/vfs_inode.c
index b1dc518..699941e 100644
--- a/fs/9p/vfs_inode.c
+++ b/fs/9p/vfs_inode.c
@@ -1368,9 +1368,6 @@ v9fs_vfs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, umode_t mode, dev_t rde
 		 dir->i_ino, dentry, mode,
 		 MAJOR(rdev), MINOR(rdev));
 
-	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
-		return -EINVAL;
-
 	/* build extension */
 	if (S_ISBLK(mode))
 		sprintf(name, "b %u %u", MAJOR(rdev), MINOR(rdev));
diff --git a/fs/9p/vfs_inode_dotl.c b/fs/9p/vfs_inode_dotl.c
index e8aa57d..cb899af 100644
--- a/fs/9p/vfs_inode_dotl.c
+++ b/fs/9p/vfs_inode_dotl.c
@@ -829,9 +829,6 @@ v9fs_vfs_mknod_dotl(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, umode_t omode,
 		 dir->i_ino, dentry, omode,
 		 MAJOR(rdev), MINOR(rdev));
 
-	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
-		return -EINVAL;
-
 	v9ses = v9fs_inode2v9ses(dir);
 	dir_dentry = dentry->d_parent;
 	dfid = v9fs_fid_lookup(dir_dentry);
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH 04/17] fs/btrfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Yaowei Bai]

As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
needed, remove it.

Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
---
 fs/btrfs/inode.c | 3 ---
 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
index 611b66d..0946790 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
@@ -6268,9 +6268,6 @@ static int btrfs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry,
 	u64 objectid;
 	u64 index = 0;
 
-	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
-		return -EINVAL;
-
 	/*
 	 * 2 for inode item and ref
 	 * 2 for dir items
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH 05/17] fs/exofs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Yaowei Bai]

As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
needed, remove it.

Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
---
 fs/exofs/namei.c | 3 ---
 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/exofs/namei.c b/fs/exofs/namei.c
index 09a6bb1..994e078 100644
--- a/fs/exofs/namei.c
+++ b/fs/exofs/namei.c
@@ -80,9 +80,6 @@ static int exofs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, umode_t mode,
 	struct inode *inode;
 	int err;
 
-	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
-		return -EINVAL;
-
 	inode = exofs_new_inode(dir, mode);
 	err = PTR_ERR(inode);
 	if (!IS_ERR(inode)) {
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH 06/17] fs/ext2: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Yaowei Bai]

As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
needed, remove it.

Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
---
 fs/ext2/namei.c | 3 ---
 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/ext2/namei.c b/fs/ext2/namei.c
index b4841e3..3267a80 100644
--- a/fs/ext2/namei.c
+++ b/fs/ext2/namei.c
@@ -143,9 +143,6 @@ static int ext2_mknod (struct inode * dir, struct dentry *dentry, umode_t mode,
 	struct inode * inode;
 	int err;
 
-	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
-		return -EINVAL;
-
 	err = dquot_initialize(dir);
 	if (err)
 		return err;
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH 07/17] fs/ext4: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Yaowei Bai]

As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
needed, remove it.

Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
---
 fs/ext4/namei.c | 3 ---
 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/ext4/namei.c b/fs/ext4/namei.c
index 9f61e76..41b6cc8 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/namei.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/namei.c
@@ -2469,9 +2469,6 @@ static int ext4_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry,
 	struct inode *inode;
 	int err, credits, retries = 0;
 
-	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
-		return -EINVAL;
-
 	err = dquot_initialize(dir);
 	if (err)
 		return err;
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH 08/17] fs/f2fs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Yaowei Bai]

As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
needed, remove it.

Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
---
 fs/f2fs/namei.c | 3 ---
 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/f2fs/namei.c b/fs/f2fs/namei.c
index a680bf3..c87ec52 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/namei.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/namei.c
@@ -478,9 +478,6 @@ static int f2fs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry,
 	struct inode *inode;
 	int err = 0;
 
-	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
-		return -EINVAL;
-
 	f2fs_balance_fs(sbi);
 
 	inode = f2fs_new_inode(dir, mode);
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH 09/17] fs/hpfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Yaowei Bai]

As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
needed, remove it.

Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
---
 fs/hpfs/namei.c | 2 --
 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/hpfs/namei.c b/fs/hpfs/namei.c
index 9e92c9c..ae4d5a1 100644
--- a/fs/hpfs/namei.c
+++ b/fs/hpfs/namei.c
@@ -227,8 +227,6 @@ static int hpfs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, umode_t mode, de
 	int err;
 	if ((err = hpfs_chk_name(name, &len))) return err==-ENOENT ? -EINVAL : err;
 	if (hpfs_sb(dir->i_sb)->sb_eas < 2) return -EPERM;
-	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
-		return -EINVAL;
 	hpfs_lock(dir->i_sb);
 	err = -ENOSPC;
 	fnode = hpfs_alloc_fnode(dir->i_sb, hpfs_i(dir)->i_dno, &fno, &bh);
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH 10/17] fs/jffs2: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Yaowei Bai]

As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
needed, remove it.

Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
---
 fs/jffs2/dir.c | 3 ---
 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/jffs2/dir.c b/fs/jffs2/dir.c
index 8118002..d211b8e 100644
--- a/fs/jffs2/dir.c
+++ b/fs/jffs2/dir.c
@@ -621,9 +621,6 @@ static int jffs2_mknod (struct inode *dir_i, struct dentry *dentry, umode_t mode
 	uint32_t alloclen;
 	int ret;
 
-	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
-		return -EINVAL;
-
 	ri = jffs2_alloc_raw_inode();
 	if (!ri)
 		return -ENOMEM;
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH 11/17] fs/jfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Yaowei Bai]

As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
needed, remove it.

Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
---
 fs/jfs/namei.c | 3 ---
 fs/jfs/super.c | 3 ---
 2 files changed, 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/jfs/namei.c b/fs/jfs/namei.c
index 35976bd..9d7551f 100644
--- a/fs/jfs/namei.c
+++ b/fs/jfs/namei.c
@@ -1372,9 +1372,6 @@ static int jfs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry,
 	tid_t tid;
 	struct tblock *tblk;
 
-	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
-		return -EINVAL;
-
 	jfs_info("jfs_mknod: %pd", dentry);
 
 	rc = dquot_initialize(dir);
diff --git a/fs/jfs/super.c b/fs/jfs/super.c
index 4cd9798..8f9176c 100644
--- a/fs/jfs/super.c
+++ b/fs/jfs/super.c
@@ -496,9 +496,6 @@ static int jfs_fill_super(struct super_block *sb, void *data, int silent)
 
 	jfs_info("In jfs_read_super: s_flags=0x%lx", sb->s_flags);
 
-	if (!new_valid_dev(sb->s_bdev->bd_dev))
-		return -EOVERFLOW;
-
 	sbi = kzalloc(sizeof(struct jfs_sb_info), GFP_KERNEL);
 	if (!sbi)
 		return -ENOMEM;
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH 06/17] fs/ext2: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Yaowei Bai]

As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
needed, remove it.

Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
---
 fs/ext2/namei.c | 3 ---
 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/ext2/namei.c b/fs/ext2/namei.c
index b4841e3..3267a80 100644
--- a/fs/ext2/namei.c
+++ b/fs/ext2/namei.c
@@ -143,9 +143,6 @@ static int ext2_mknod (struct inode * dir, struct dentry *dentry, umode_t mode,
 	struct inode * inode;
 	int err;
 
-	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
-		return -EINVAL;
-
 	err = dquot_initialize(dir);
 	if (err)
 		return err;
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH 12/17] fs/ncpfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Yaowei Bai]

As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
needed, remove it.

Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
---
 fs/ncpfs/dir.c | 2 --
 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/ncpfs/dir.c b/fs/ncpfs/dir.c
index 93575e9..2d9891a 100644
--- a/fs/ncpfs/dir.c
+++ b/fs/ncpfs/dir.c
@@ -1165,8 +1165,6 @@ out:
 static int ncp_mknod(struct inode * dir, struct dentry *dentry,
 		     umode_t mode, dev_t rdev)
 {
-	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
-		return -EINVAL;
 	if (ncp_is_nfs_extras(NCP_SERVER(dir), NCP_FINFO(dir)->volNumber)) {
 		ncp_dbg(1, "mode = 0%ho\n", mode);
 		return ncp_create_new(dir, dentry, mode, rdev, 0);
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH 13/17] fs/nfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Yaowei Bai]

As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
needed, remove it.

Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
---
 fs/nfs/dir.c | 3 ---
 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/nfs/dir.c b/fs/nfs/dir.c
index 3d8e4ff..ce5a218 100644
--- a/fs/nfs/dir.c
+++ b/fs/nfs/dir.c
@@ -1714,9 +1714,6 @@ nfs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, umode_t mode, dev_t rdev)
 	dfprintk(VFS, "NFS: mknod(%s/%lu), %pd\n",
 			dir->i_sb->s_id, dir->i_ino, dentry);
 
-	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
-		return -EINVAL;
-
 	attr.ia_mode = mode;
 	attr.ia_valid = ATTR_MODE;
 
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH 14/17] fs/nilfs2: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Yaowei Bai]

As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
needed, remove it.

Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
---
 fs/nilfs2/namei.c | 3 ---
 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/nilfs2/namei.c b/fs/nilfs2/namei.c
index 37dd6b0..c9a1a49 100644
--- a/fs/nilfs2/namei.c
+++ b/fs/nilfs2/namei.c
@@ -120,9 +120,6 @@ nilfs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, umode_t mode, dev_t rdev)
 	struct nilfs_transaction_info ti;
 	int err;
 
-	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
-		return -EINVAL;
-
 	err = nilfs_transaction_begin(dir->i_sb, &ti, 1);
 	if (err)
 		return err;
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH 15/17] fs/reiserfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Yaowei Bai]

As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
needed, remove it.

Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
---
 fs/reiserfs/namei.c | 3 ---
 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/reiserfs/namei.c b/fs/reiserfs/namei.c
index 5f1c9c2..47f9698 100644
--- a/fs/reiserfs/namei.c
+++ b/fs/reiserfs/namei.c
@@ -712,9 +712,6 @@ static int reiserfs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, umode_t mode
 	    2 * (REISERFS_QUOTA_INIT_BLOCKS(dir->i_sb) +
 		 REISERFS_QUOTA_TRANS_BLOCKS(dir->i_sb));
 
-	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
-		return -EINVAL;
-
 	retval = dquot_initialize(dir);
 	if (retval)
 		return retval;
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH 16/17] fs/stat: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Yaowei Bai]

As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
needed, remove it.

Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
---
 fs/stat.c | 2 --
 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/stat.c b/fs/stat.c
index cccc1aa..d4a61d8 100644
--- a/fs/stat.c
+++ b/fs/stat.c
@@ -367,8 +367,6 @@ static long cp_new_stat64(struct kstat *stat, struct stat64 __user *statbuf)
 	INIT_STRUCT_STAT64_PADDING(tmp);
 #ifdef CONFIG_MIPS
 	/* mips has weird padding, so we don't get 64 bits there */
-	if (!new_valid_dev(stat->dev) || !new_valid_dev(stat->rdev))
-		return -EOVERFLOW;
 	tmp.st_dev = new_encode_dev(stat->dev);
 	tmp.st_rdev = new_encode_dev(stat->rdev);
 #else
-- 
1.9.1

[PATCH 17/17] fs/ubifs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Yaowei Bai]

As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so new_valid_dev check is not
needed, remove it.

Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
---
 fs/ubifs/dir.c  | 3 ---
 fs/ubifs/misc.h | 9 ++-------
 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/ubifs/dir.c b/fs/ubifs/dir.c
index 5c27c66..1dd9267 100644
--- a/fs/ubifs/dir.c
+++ b/fs/ubifs/dir.c
@@ -787,9 +787,6 @@ static int ubifs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry,
 
 	dbg_gen("dent '%pd' in dir ino %lu", dentry, dir->i_ino);
 
-	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
-		return -EINVAL;
-
 	if (S_ISBLK(mode) || S_ISCHR(mode)) {
 		dev = kmalloc(sizeof(union ubifs_dev_desc), GFP_NOFS);
 		if (!dev)
diff --git a/fs/ubifs/misc.h b/fs/ubifs/misc.h
index ee7cb5e..0197ed6 100644
--- a/fs/ubifs/misc.h
+++ b/fs/ubifs/misc.h
@@ -155,13 +155,8 @@ static inline int ubifs_wbuf_sync(struct ubifs_wbuf *wbuf)
  */
 static inline int ubifs_encode_dev(union ubifs_dev_desc *dev, dev_t rdev)
 {
-	if (new_valid_dev(rdev)) {
-		dev->new = cpu_to_le32(new_encode_dev(rdev));
-		return sizeof(dev->new);
-	} else {
-		dev->huge = cpu_to_le64(huge_encode_dev(rdev));
-		return sizeof(dev->huge);
-	}
+	dev->huge = cpu_to_le64(huge_encode_dev(rdev));
+	return sizeof(dev->huge);
 }
 
 /**
-- 
1.9.1

Re: [Jfs-discussion] [PATCH 11/17] fs/jfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Dave Kleikamp]

On 09/28/2015 09:18 AM, Yaowei Bai wrote:
> As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
> needed, remove it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>

Acked-by: Dave Kleikamp <dave.kleikamp@oracle.com>

> ---
>  fs/jfs/namei.c | 3 ---
>  fs/jfs/super.c | 3 ---
>  2 files changed, 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/jfs/namei.c b/fs/jfs/namei.c
> index 35976bd..9d7551f 100644
> --- a/fs/jfs/namei.c
> +++ b/fs/jfs/namei.c
> @@ -1372,9 +1372,6 @@ static int jfs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry,
>  	tid_t tid;
>  	struct tblock *tblk;
>  
> -	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
> -		return -EINVAL;
> -
>  	jfs_info("jfs_mknod: %pd", dentry);
>  
>  	rc = dquot_initialize(dir);
> diff --git a/fs/jfs/super.c b/fs/jfs/super.c
> index 4cd9798..8f9176c 100644
> --- a/fs/jfs/super.c
> +++ b/fs/jfs/super.c
> @@ -496,9 +496,6 @@ static int jfs_fill_super(struct super_block *sb, void *data, int silent)
>  
>  	jfs_info("In jfs_read_super: s_flags=0x%lx", sb->s_flags);
>  
> -	if (!new_valid_dev(sb->s_bdev->bd_dev))
> -		return -EOVERFLOW;
> -
>  	sbi = kzalloc(sizeof(struct jfs_sb_info), GFP_KERNEL);
>  	if (!sbi)
>  		return -ENOMEM;
> 

Re: [PATCH 17/17] fs/ubifs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Richard Weinberger]

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 4:53 PM, Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com> wrote:
> As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so new_valid_dev check is not
> needed, remove it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
> ---
>  fs/ubifs/dir.c  | 3 ---
>  fs/ubifs/misc.h | 9 ++-------
>  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ubifs/dir.c b/fs/ubifs/dir.c
> index 5c27c66..1dd9267 100644
> --- a/fs/ubifs/dir.c
> +++ b/fs/ubifs/dir.c
> @@ -787,9 +787,6 @@ static int ubifs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry,
>
>         dbg_gen("dent '%pd' in dir ino %lu", dentry, dir->i_ino);
>
> -       if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
> -               return -EINVAL;
> -
>         if (S_ISBLK(mode) || S_ISCHR(mode)) {
>                 dev = kmalloc(sizeof(union ubifs_dev_desc), GFP_NOFS);
>                 if (!dev)
> diff --git a/fs/ubifs/misc.h b/fs/ubifs/misc.h
> index ee7cb5e..0197ed6 100644
> --- a/fs/ubifs/misc.h
> +++ b/fs/ubifs/misc.h
> @@ -155,13 +155,8 @@ static inline int ubifs_wbuf_sync(struct ubifs_wbuf *wbuf)
>   */
>  static inline int ubifs_encode_dev(union ubifs_dev_desc *dev, dev_t rdev)
>  {
> -       if (new_valid_dev(rdev)) {
> -               dev->new = cpu_to_le32(new_encode_dev(rdev));
> -               return sizeof(dev->new);
> -       } else {
> -               dev->huge = cpu_to_le64(huge_encode_dev(rdev));
> -               return sizeof(dev->huge);
> -       }
> +       dev->huge = cpu_to_le64(huge_encode_dev(rdev));
> +       return sizeof(dev->huge);

Please be careful.

dev->new = cpu_to_le32(new_encode_dev(rdev));
return sizeof(dev->huge);

...is the correct branch. You enabled the dead one.

-- 
Thanks,
//richard

Re: [PATCH 10/17] fs/jffs2: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Brian Norris]

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 10:15:38PM +0800, Yaowei Bai wrote:
> As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
> needed, remove it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>

Pushed to l2-mtd.git

Re: [PATCH 17/17] fs/ubifs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Yaowei Bai]

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 09:20:32PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 4:53 PM, Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com> wrote:
> > As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so new_valid_dev check is not
> > needed, remove it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
> > ---
> >  fs/ubifs/dir.c  | 3 ---
> >  fs/ubifs/misc.h | 9 ++-------
> >  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/ubifs/dir.c b/fs/ubifs/dir.c
> > index 5c27c66..1dd9267 100644
> > --- a/fs/ubifs/dir.c
> > +++ b/fs/ubifs/dir.c
> > @@ -787,9 +787,6 @@ static int ubifs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry,
> >
> >         dbg_gen("dent '%pd' in dir ino %lu", dentry, dir->i_ino);
> >
> > -       if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
> > -               return -EINVAL;
> > -
> >         if (S_ISBLK(mode) || S_ISCHR(mode)) {
> >                 dev = kmalloc(sizeof(union ubifs_dev_desc), GFP_NOFS);
> >                 if (!dev)
> > diff --git a/fs/ubifs/misc.h b/fs/ubifs/misc.h
> > index ee7cb5e..0197ed6 100644
> > --- a/fs/ubifs/misc.h
> > +++ b/fs/ubifs/misc.h
> > @@ -155,13 +155,8 @@ static inline int ubifs_wbuf_sync(struct ubifs_wbuf *wbuf)
> >   */
> >  static inline int ubifs_encode_dev(union ubifs_dev_desc *dev, dev_t rdev)
> >  {
> > -       if (new_valid_dev(rdev)) {
> > -               dev->new = cpu_to_le32(new_encode_dev(rdev));
> > -               return sizeof(dev->new);
> > -       } else {
> > -               dev->huge = cpu_to_le64(huge_encode_dev(rdev));
> > -               return sizeof(dev->huge);
> > -       }
> > +       dev->huge = cpu_to_le64(huge_encode_dev(rdev));
> > +       return sizeof(dev->huge);
> 
> Please be careful.
> 
> dev->new = cpu_to_le32(new_encode_dev(rdev));
> return sizeof(dev->huge);
> 
> ...is the correct branch. You enabled the dead one.

Sorry about that, will resend fixing it. Thanks.

> 
> -- 
> Thanks,
> //richard

Re: [PATCH 05/17] fs/exofs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Boaz Harrosh]

On 09/28/2015 04:43 PM, Yaowei Bai wrote:
> As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
> needed, remove it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>

ACK-by: Boaz Harrosh <ooo@electrozaur.com>

Please submit this through some General tree like the vfs or mm-tree

Thanks
Boaz

> ---
>  fs/exofs/namei.c | 3 ---
>  1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/exofs/namei.c b/fs/exofs/namei.c
> index 09a6bb1..994e078 100644
> --- a/fs/exofs/namei.c
> +++ b/fs/exofs/namei.c
> @@ -80,9 +80,6 @@ static int exofs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, umode_t mode,
>  	struct inode *inode;
>  	int err;
>  
> -	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
> -		return -EINVAL;
> -
>  	inode = exofs_new_inode(dir, mode);
>  	err = PTR_ERR(inode);
>  	if (!IS_ERR(inode)) {
> 

[PATCH] fs/ubifs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Yaowei Bai]

As currently new_valid_dev always returns 1, so new_valid_dev check is not
needed, remove it.

Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
---
 fs/ubifs/dir.c  | 3 ---
 fs/ubifs/misc.h | 9 ++-------
 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/ubifs/dir.c b/fs/ubifs/dir.c
index 5c27c66..1dd9267 100644
--- a/fs/ubifs/dir.c
+++ b/fs/ubifs/dir.c
@@ -787,9 +787,6 @@ static int ubifs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry,
 
 	dbg_gen("dent '%pd' in dir ino %lu", dentry, dir->i_ino);
 
-	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
-		return -EINVAL;
-
 	if (S_ISBLK(mode) || S_ISCHR(mode)) {
 		dev = kmalloc(sizeof(union ubifs_dev_desc), GFP_NOFS);
 		if (!dev)
diff --git a/fs/ubifs/misc.h b/fs/ubifs/misc.h
index ee7cb5e..8ece6ca 100644
--- a/fs/ubifs/misc.h
+++ b/fs/ubifs/misc.h
@@ -155,13 +155,8 @@ static inline int ubifs_wbuf_sync(struct ubifs_wbuf *wbuf)
  */
 static inline int ubifs_encode_dev(union ubifs_dev_desc *dev, dev_t rdev)
 {
-	if (new_valid_dev(rdev)) {
-		dev->new = cpu_to_le32(new_encode_dev(rdev));
-		return sizeof(dev->new);
-	} else {
-		dev->huge = cpu_to_le64(huge_encode_dev(rdev));
-		return sizeof(dev->huge);
-	}
+	dev->new = cpu_to_le32(new_encode_dev(rdev));
+	return sizeof(dev->new);
 }
 
 /**
-- 
1.9.1

Re: [PATCH 14/17] fs/nilfs2: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Ryusuke Konishi]

On 2015/09/28 23:33, Yaowei Bai wrote:
> As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
> needed, remove it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>

Acked-by: Ryusuke Konishi <konishi.ryusuke@lab.ntt.co.jp>

> ---
>   fs/nilfs2/namei.c | 3 ---
>   1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/nilfs2/namei.c b/fs/nilfs2/namei.c
> index 37dd6b0..c9a1a49 100644
> --- a/fs/nilfs2/namei.c
> +++ b/fs/nilfs2/namei.c
> @@ -120,9 +120,6 @@ nilfs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, umode_t mode, dev_t rdev)
>   	struct nilfs_transaction_info ti;
>   	int err;
>   
> -	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
> -		return -EINVAL;
> -
>   	err = nilfs_transaction_begin(dir->i_sb, &ti, 1);
>   	if (err)
>   		return err;
> 

Re: [PATCH 04/17] fs/btrfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[David Sterba]

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 09:39:00PM +0800, Yaowei Bai wrote:
> As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
> needed, remove it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>

Acked-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>

Re: [PATCH 09/17] fs/hpfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Mikulas Patocka]

Hi

I suppose that you should remove the function new_valid_dev at all.

Mikulas


On Mon, 28 Sep 2015, Yaowei Bai wrote:

> As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
> needed, remove it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
> ---
>  fs/hpfs/namei.c | 2 --
>  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/hpfs/namei.c b/fs/hpfs/namei.c
> index 9e92c9c..ae4d5a1 100644
> --- a/fs/hpfs/namei.c
> +++ b/fs/hpfs/namei.c
> @@ -227,8 +227,6 @@ static int hpfs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, umode_t mode, de
>  	int err;
>  	if ((err = hpfs_chk_name(name, &len))) return err==-ENOENT ? -EINVAL : err;
>  	if (hpfs_sb(dir->i_sb)->sb_eas < 2) return -EPERM;
> -	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
> -		return -EINVAL;
>  	hpfs_lock(dir->i_sb);
>  	err = -ENOSPC;
>  	fnode = hpfs_alloc_fnode(dir->i_sb, hpfs_i(dir)->i_dno, &fno, &bh);
> -- 
> 1.9.1
> 
> 
> 

Re: [PATCH 05/17] fs/exofs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Yaowei Bai]

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 04:47:30PM +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> On 09/28/2015 04:43 PM, Yaowei Bai wrote:
> > As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
> > needed, remove it.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
> 
> ACK-by: Boaz Harrosh <ooo@electrozaur.com>

Thanks.

> 
> Please submit this through some General tree like the vfs or mm-tree

This's my first fs-specific patch, so i think you mean i should cc vfs
or mm-tree?

> 
> Thanks
> Boaz
> 
> > ---
> >  fs/exofs/namei.c | 3 ---
> >  1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/exofs/namei.c b/fs/exofs/namei.c
> > index 09a6bb1..994e078 100644
> > --- a/fs/exofs/namei.c
> > +++ b/fs/exofs/namei.c
> > @@ -80,9 +80,6 @@ static int exofs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, umode_t mode,
> >  	struct inode *inode;
> >  	int err;
> >  
> > -	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
> > -		return -EINVAL;
> > -
> >  	inode = exofs_new_inode(dir, mode);
> >  	err = PTR_ERR(inode);
> >  	if (!IS_ERR(inode)) {
> > 

Re: [PATCH] fs/ubifs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Richard Weinberger]

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 3:57 PM, Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com> wrote:
> As currently new_valid_dev always returns 1, so new_valid_dev check is not
> needed, remove it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
> ---
>  fs/ubifs/dir.c  | 3 ---
>  fs/ubifs/misc.h | 9 ++-------
>  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ubifs/dir.c b/fs/ubifs/dir.c
> index 5c27c66..1dd9267 100644
> --- a/fs/ubifs/dir.c
> +++ b/fs/ubifs/dir.c
> @@ -787,9 +787,6 @@ static int ubifs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry,
>
>         dbg_gen("dent '%pd' in dir ino %lu", dentry, dir->i_ino);
>
> -       if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
> -               return -EINVAL;
> -
>         if (S_ISBLK(mode) || S_ISCHR(mode)) {
>                 dev = kmalloc(sizeof(union ubifs_dev_desc), GFP_NOFS);
>                 if (!dev)
> diff --git a/fs/ubifs/misc.h b/fs/ubifs/misc.h
> index ee7cb5e..8ece6ca 100644
> --- a/fs/ubifs/misc.h
> +++ b/fs/ubifs/misc.h
> @@ -155,13 +155,8 @@ static inline int ubifs_wbuf_sync(struct ubifs_wbuf *wbuf)
>   */
>  static inline int ubifs_encode_dev(union ubifs_dev_desc *dev, dev_t rdev)
>  {
> -       if (new_valid_dev(rdev)) {
> -               dev->new = cpu_to_le32(new_encode_dev(rdev));
> -               return sizeof(dev->new);
> -       } else {
> -               dev->huge = cpu_to_le64(huge_encode_dev(rdev));
> -               return sizeof(dev->huge);
> -       }
> +       dev->new = cpu_to_le32(new_encode_dev(rdev));
> +       return sizeof(dev->new);
>  }

Reviewed-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>

-- 
Thanks,
//richard

Re: [PATCH 05/17] fs/exofs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Boaz Harrosh]

On 09/29/2015 06:46 PM, Yaowei Bai wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 04:47:30PM +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>> On 09/28/2015 04:43 PM, Yaowei Bai wrote:
>>> As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
>>> needed, remove it.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
>>
>> ACK-by: Boaz Harrosh <ooo@electrozaur.com>
> 
> Thanks.
> 
>>
>> Please submit this through some General tree like the vfs or mm-tree
> 
> This's my first fs-specific patch, so i think you mean i should cc vfs
> or mm-tree?
> 

Yes you should ask Al (or Morton) to take the all patchset through their
tree. Then once all users of new_valid_dev() are gone it can be removed
in the one tree.

Thanks
Boaz

>>
>> Thanks
>> Boaz
>>
>>> ---
>>>  fs/exofs/namei.c | 3 ---
>>>  1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/exofs/namei.c b/fs/exofs/namei.c
>>> index 09a6bb1..994e078 100644
>>> --- a/fs/exofs/namei.c
>>> +++ b/fs/exofs/namei.c
>>> @@ -80,9 +80,6 @@ static int exofs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, umode_t mode,
>>>  	struct inode *inode;
>>>  	int err;
>>>  
>>> -	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
>>> -		return -EINVAL;
>>> -
>>>  	inode = exofs_new_inode(dir, mode);
>>>  	err = PTR_ERR(inode);
>>>  	if (!IS_ERR(inode)) {
>>>
> 
> 

Re: [PATCH 09/17] fs/hpfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Yaowei Bai]

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 05:03:24PM +0200, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I suppose that you should remove the function new_valid_dev at all.

Yes, i thought about that, but actually there's still a user of
new_valid_dev in fs/stat.c:

	#define valid_dev(x)  choose_32_64(old_valid_dev,new_valid_dev)(x)

so i just left new_valid_dev untouched and removed other users in fs first.

> 
> Mikulas
> 
> 
> On Mon, 28 Sep 2015, Yaowei Bai wrote:
> 
> > As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
> > needed, remove it.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
> > ---
> >  fs/hpfs/namei.c | 2 --
> >  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/hpfs/namei.c b/fs/hpfs/namei.c
> > index 9e92c9c..ae4d5a1 100644
> > --- a/fs/hpfs/namei.c
> > +++ b/fs/hpfs/namei.c
> > @@ -227,8 +227,6 @@ static int hpfs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, umode_t mode, de
> >  	int err;
> >  	if ((err = hpfs_chk_name(name, &len))) return err==-ENOENT ? -EINVAL : err;
> >  	if (hpfs_sb(dir->i_sb)->sb_eas < 2) return -EPERM;
> > -	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
> > -		return -EINVAL;
> >  	hpfs_lock(dir->i_sb);
> >  	err = -ENOSPC;
> >  	fnode = hpfs_alloc_fnode(dir->i_sb, hpfs_i(dir)->i_dno, &fno, &bh);
> > -- 
> > 1.9.1
> > 
> > 
> > 

Re: [PATCH] fs/ubifs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Artem Bityutskiy]

On Wed, 2015-09-30 at 10:11 +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> >  {
> > -       if (new_valid_dev(rdev)) {
> > -               dev->new = cpu_to_le32(new_encode_dev(rdev));
> > -               return sizeof(dev->new);
> > -       } else {
> > -               dev->huge = cpu_to_le64(huge_encode_dev(rdev));
> > -               return sizeof(dev->huge);
> > -       }
> > +       dev->new = cpu_to_le32(new_encode_dev(rdev));
> > +       return sizeof(dev->new);
> >  }
> 
> Reviewed-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>

Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy <artem.bityutskiy@linux.intel.com>

Re: [PATCH 09/17] fs/hpfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Mikulas Patocka]

On Wed, 30 Sep 2015, Yaowei Bai wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 05:03:24PM +0200, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> > Hi
> > 
> > I suppose that you should remove the function new_valid_dev at all.
> 
> Yes, i thought about that, but actually there's still a user of
> new_valid_dev in fs/stat.c:
> 
> 	#define valid_dev(x)  choose_32_64(old_valid_dev,new_valid_dev)(x)
> 
> so i just left new_valid_dev untouched and removed other users in fs first.

So, remove that too - change it to choose_32_64(old_valid_dev(x),true)

If you remove most calls for the function new_valid_dev, the function is 
meaningless and shouldn't be present in the source code.

Mikulas

Re: [PATCH 09/17] fs/hpfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Yaowei Bai]

On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 10:49:41PM +0200, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wed, 30 Sep 2015, Yaowei Bai wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 05:03:24PM +0200, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> > > Hi
> > > 
> > > I suppose that you should remove the function new_valid_dev at all.
> > 
> > Yes, i thought about that, but actually there's still a user of
> > new_valid_dev in fs/stat.c:
> > 
> > 	#define valid_dev(x)  choose_32_64(old_valid_dev,new_valid_dev)(x)
> > 
> > so i just left new_valid_dev untouched and removed other users in fs first.
> 
> So, remove that too - change it to choose_32_64(old_valid_dev(x),true)
> 
> If you remove most calls for the function new_valid_dev, the function is 
> meaningless and shouldn't be present in the source code.

Sorry for delay reply. OK, i will follow your advice and send another patch to
remove it once this patchset's taken by vfs or mm tree. Thanks for reviewing.

Yaowei

> 
> Mikulas

Re: [PATCH 05/17] fs/exofs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Yaowei Bai]

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 04:47:30PM +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> On 09/28/2015 04:43 PM, Yaowei Bai wrote:
> > As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
> > needed, remove it.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
> 
> ACK-by: Boaz Harrosh <ooo@electrozaur.com>
> 
> Please submit this through some General tree like the vfs or mm-tree

Sorry for delay reply. There's something wrong with my mailbox and
i lost your last recent reply. And i just want to say i will follow
your advice to send this patchset to Morton and once he takes it i'll
send another patch to remove new_valid_dev() at all. Thanks.

Thanks
Bai

> 
> Thanks
> Boaz
> 
> > ---
> >  fs/exofs/namei.c | 3 ---
> >  1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/exofs/namei.c b/fs/exofs/namei.c
> > index 09a6bb1..994e078 100644
> > --- a/fs/exofs/namei.c
> > +++ b/fs/exofs/namei.c
> > @@ -80,9 +80,6 @@ static int exofs_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, umode_t mode,
> >  	struct inode *inode;
> >  	int err;
> >  
> > -	if (!new_valid_dev(rdev))
> > -		return -EINVAL;
> > -
> >  	inode = exofs_new_inode(dir, mode);
> >  	err = PTR_ERR(inode);
> >  	if (!IS_ERR(inode)) {
> > 

Re: [PATCH 07/17] fs/ext4: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Theodore Ts'o]

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 09:50:37PM +0800, Yaowei Bai wrote:
> As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
> needed, remove it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>

Thanks, applied.

					- Ted

Re: [PATCH 07/17] fs/ext4: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check

[Yaowei Bai]

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 02:09:01PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 09:50:37PM +0800, Yaowei Bai wrote:
> > As new_valid_dev always returns 1, so !new_valid_dev check is not
> > needed, remove it.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <bywxiaobai@163.com>
> 
> Thanks, applied.

Ted, this patch has been merged into andrew's mm tree.

> 
> 					- Ted