* [PATCH 00/17] cleanups of fs about new/huge_valid_dev
@ 2015-09-28 13:26 Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 13:29 ` [PATCH 01/17] fs/kdev_t: remove unused huge_valid_dev function Yaowei Bai
` (17 more replies)
0 siblings, 18 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-09-28 13:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: viro; +Cc: linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 01/17] fs/kdev_t: remove unused huge_valid_dev function
2015-09-28 13:26 [PATCH 00/17] cleanups of fs about new/huge_valid_dev Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-28 13:29 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 13:29 ` [PATCH 02/17] fs/kdev_t: old/new_valid_dev can be boolean Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 13:34 ` [PATCH 03/17] fs/vfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check Yaowei Bai
` (16 subsequent siblings)
17 siblings, 1 reply; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-09-28 13:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: viro; +Cc: linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 02/17] fs/kdev_t: old/new_valid_dev can be boolean
2015-09-28 13:29 ` [PATCH 01/17] fs/kdev_t: remove unused huge_valid_dev function Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-28 13:29 ` Yaowei Bai
0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-09-28 13:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: viro; +Cc: linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 03/17] fs/vfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 13:26 [PATCH 00/17] cleanups of fs about new/huge_valid_dev Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 13:29 ` [PATCH 01/17] fs/kdev_t: remove unused huge_valid_dev function Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-28 13:34 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 13:39 ` [PATCH 04/17] fs/btrfs: " Yaowei Bai
` (15 subsequent siblings)
17 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-09-28 13:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: viro, ericvh, rminnich, lucho; +Cc: linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 04/17] fs/btrfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 13:26 [PATCH 00/17] cleanups of fs about new/huge_valid_dev Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 13:29 ` [PATCH 01/17] fs/kdev_t: remove unused huge_valid_dev function Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 13:34 ` [PATCH 03/17] fs/vfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-28 13:39 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-09-29 14:55 ` David Sterba
2015-09-28 13:43 ` [PATCH 05/17] fs/exofs: " Yaowei Bai
` (14 subsequent siblings)
17 siblings, 1 reply; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-09-28 13:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: viro, clm, jbacik, dsterba; +Cc: linux-btrfs, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 05/17] fs/exofs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 13:26 [PATCH 00/17] cleanups of fs about new/huge_valid_dev Yaowei Bai
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2015-09-28 13:39 ` [PATCH 04/17] fs/btrfs: " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-28 13:43 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-09-29 13:47 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-09-28 13:47 ` [PATCH 06/17] fs/ext2: " Yaowei Bai
` (13 subsequent siblings)
17 siblings, 1 reply; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-09-28 13:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: viro, ooo, bhalevy; +Cc: osd-dev, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 06/17] fs/ext2: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 13:26 [PATCH 00/17] cleanups of fs about new/huge_valid_dev Yaowei Bai
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2015-09-28 13:43 ` [PATCH 05/17] fs/exofs: " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-28 13:47 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 13:50 ` [PATCH 07/17] fs/ext4: " Yaowei Bai
` (12 subsequent siblings)
17 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-09-28 13:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: viro, jack; +Cc: linux-ext4, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 07/17] fs/ext4: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 13:26 [PATCH 00/17] cleanups of fs about new/huge_valid_dev Yaowei Bai
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2015-09-28 13:47 ` [PATCH 06/17] fs/ext2: " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-28 13:50 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-10-29 18:09 ` Theodore Ts'o
2015-09-28 13:55 ` [PATCH 08/17] fs/f2fs: " Yaowei Bai
` (11 subsequent siblings)
17 siblings, 1 reply; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-09-28 13:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: viro, tytso, adilger.kernel; +Cc: linux-ext4, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 08/17] fs/f2fs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 13:26 [PATCH 00/17] cleanups of fs about new/huge_valid_dev Yaowei Bai
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2015-09-28 13:50 ` [PATCH 07/17] fs/ext4: " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-28 13:55 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 14:11 ` [PATCH 09/17] fs/hpfs: " Yaowei Bai
` (10 subsequent siblings)
17 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-09-28 13:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: viro, jaegeuk, cm224.lee, chao2.yu
Cc: linux-f2fs-devel, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 09/17] fs/hpfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 13:26 [PATCH 00/17] cleanups of fs about new/huge_valid_dev Yaowei Bai
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2015-09-28 13:55 ` [PATCH 08/17] fs/f2fs: " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-28 14:11 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-09-29 15:03 ` Mikulas Patocka
2015-09-28 14:15 ` [PATCH 10/17] fs/jffs2: " Yaowei Bai
` (9 subsequent siblings)
17 siblings, 1 reply; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-09-28 14:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: viro, mikulas; +Cc: linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 10/17] fs/jffs2: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 13:26 [PATCH 00/17] cleanups of fs about new/huge_valid_dev Yaowei Bai
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2015-09-28 14:11 ` [PATCH 09/17] fs/hpfs: " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-28 14:15 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 23:20 ` Brian Norris
2015-09-28 14:18 ` [PATCH 11/17] fs/jfs: " Yaowei Bai
` (8 subsequent siblings)
17 siblings, 1 reply; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-09-28 14:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: viro, dwmw2; +Cc: linux-mtd, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 11/17] fs/jfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 13:26 [PATCH 00/17] cleanups of fs about new/huge_valid_dev Yaowei Bai
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2015-09-28 14:15 ` [PATCH 10/17] fs/jffs2: " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-28 14:18 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 15:42 ` [Jfs-discussion] " Dave Kleikamp
2015-09-28 14:21 ` [PATCH 06/17] fs/ext2: " Yaowei Bai
` (7 subsequent siblings)
17 siblings, 1 reply; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-09-28 14:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: viro, shaggy; +Cc: jfs-discussion, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 06/17] fs/ext2: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 13:26 [PATCH 00/17] cleanups of fs about new/huge_valid_dev Yaowei Bai
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2015-09-28 14:18 ` [PATCH 11/17] fs/jfs: " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-28 14:21 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 14:25 ` [PATCH 12/17] fs/ncpfs: " Yaowei Bai
` (6 subsequent siblings)
17 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-09-28 14:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: viro, jack; +Cc: linux-ext4, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 12/17] fs/ncpfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 13:26 [PATCH 00/17] cleanups of fs about new/huge_valid_dev Yaowei Bai
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2015-09-28 14:21 ` [PATCH 06/17] fs/ext2: " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-28 14:25 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 14:30 ` [PATCH 13/17] fs/nfs: " Yaowei Bai
` (5 subsequent siblings)
17 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-09-28 14:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: viro, petr, jack, axboe, akpm, tj, fabf, dhowells
Cc: linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 13/17] fs/nfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 13:26 [PATCH 00/17] cleanups of fs about new/huge_valid_dev Yaowei Bai
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2015-09-28 14:25 ` [PATCH 12/17] fs/ncpfs: " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-28 14:30 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 14:33 ` [PATCH 14/17] fs/nilfs2: " Yaowei Bai
` (4 subsequent siblings)
17 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-09-28 14:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: viro, trond.myklebust, anna.schumaker
Cc: linux-nfs, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 14/17] fs/nilfs2: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 13:26 [PATCH 00/17] cleanups of fs about new/huge_valid_dev Yaowei Bai
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2015-09-28 14:30 ` [PATCH 13/17] fs/nfs: " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-28 14:33 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-09-29 14:51 ` Ryusuke Konishi
2015-09-28 14:47 ` [PATCH 15/17] fs/reiserfs: " Yaowei Bai
` (3 subsequent siblings)
17 siblings, 1 reply; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-09-28 14:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: viro, konishi.ryusuke; +Cc: linux-nilfs, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 15/17] fs/reiserfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 13:26 [PATCH 00/17] cleanups of fs about new/huge_valid_dev Yaowei Bai
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2015-09-28 14:33 ` [PATCH 14/17] fs/nilfs2: " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-28 14:47 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 14:50 ` [PATCH 16/17] fs/stat: " Yaowei Bai
` (2 subsequent siblings)
17 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-09-28 14:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: viro, jack, akpm, osandov, keescook, fabf, dhowells
Cc: reiserfs-devel, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 16/17] fs/stat: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 13:26 [PATCH 00/17] cleanups of fs about new/huge_valid_dev Yaowei Bai
` (14 preceding siblings ...)
2015-09-28 14:47 ` [PATCH 15/17] fs/reiserfs: " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-28 14:50 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 14:53 ` [PATCH 17/17] fs/ubifs: " Yaowei Bai
2015-09-29 13:57 ` [PATCH] " Yaowei Bai
17 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-09-28 14:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: viro; +Cc: linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 17/17] fs/ubifs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 13:26 [PATCH 00/17] cleanups of fs about new/huge_valid_dev Yaowei Bai
` (15 preceding siblings ...)
2015-09-28 14:50 ` [PATCH 16/17] fs/stat: " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-28 14:53 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 19:20 ` Richard Weinberger
2015-09-29 13:57 ` [PATCH] " Yaowei Bai
17 siblings, 1 reply; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-09-28 14:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: viro, dedekind1, adrian.hunter; +Cc: linux-mtd, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [Jfs-discussion] [PATCH 11/17] fs/jfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 14:18 ` [PATCH 11/17] fs/jfs: " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-28 15:42 ` Dave Kleikamp
0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: Dave Kleikamp @ 2015-09-28 15:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaowei Bai, viro; +Cc: linux-fsdevel, jfs-discussion, linux-kernel
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;
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 17/17] fs/ubifs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 14:53 ` [PATCH 17/17] fs/ubifs: " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-28 19:20 ` Richard Weinberger
2015-09-29 13:43 ` Yaowei Bai
0 siblings, 1 reply; 38+ messages in thread
From: Richard Weinberger @ 2015-09-28 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaowei Bai
Cc: Al Viro, Artem Bityutskiy, Adrian Hunter, linux-mtd, linux-fsdevel, LKML
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 10/17] fs/jffs2: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 14:15 ` [PATCH 10/17] fs/jffs2: " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-28 23:20 ` Brian Norris
0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: Brian Norris @ 2015-09-28 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaowei Bai; +Cc: viro, dwmw2, linux-fsdevel, linux-mtd, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 17/17] fs/ubifs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 19:20 ` Richard Weinberger
@ 2015-09-29 13:43 ` Yaowei Bai
0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-09-29 13:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Weinberger
Cc: Al Viro, Artem Bityutskiy, Adrian Hunter, linux-mtd, linux-fsdevel, LKML
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 05/17] fs/exofs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 13:43 ` [PATCH 05/17] fs/exofs: " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-29 13:47 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-09-29 15:46 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-10-08 12:29 ` Yaowei Bai
0 siblings, 2 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: Boaz Harrosh @ 2015-09-29 13:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaowei Bai, viro, bhalevy; +Cc: osd-dev, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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)) {
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] fs/ubifs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 13:26 [PATCH 00/17] cleanups of fs about new/huge_valid_dev Yaowei Bai
` (16 preceding siblings ...)
2015-09-28 14:53 ` [PATCH 17/17] fs/ubifs: " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-29 13:57 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-09-30 8:11 ` Richard Weinberger
17 siblings, 1 reply; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-09-29 13:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: viro, dedekind1, adrian.hunter; +Cc: linux-mtd, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 14/17] fs/nilfs2: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 14:33 ` [PATCH 14/17] fs/nilfs2: " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-29 14:51 ` Ryusuke Konishi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: Ryusuke Konishi @ 2015-09-29 14:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaowei Bai, viro; +Cc: linux-nilfs, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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;
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 04/17] fs/btrfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 13:39 ` [PATCH 04/17] fs/btrfs: " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-29 14:55 ` David Sterba
0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: David Sterba @ 2015-09-29 14:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaowei Bai
Cc: viro, clm, jbacik, dsterba, linux-btrfs, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 09/17] fs/hpfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 14:11 ` [PATCH 09/17] fs/hpfs: " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-29 15:03 ` Mikulas Patocka
2015-09-30 11:13 ` Yaowei Bai
0 siblings, 1 reply; 38+ messages in thread
From: Mikulas Patocka @ 2015-09-29 15:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaowei Bai; +Cc: viro, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
>
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 05/17] fs/exofs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-29 13:47 ` Boaz Harrosh
@ 2015-09-29 15:46 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-09-30 10:26 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-10-08 12:29 ` Yaowei Bai
1 sibling, 1 reply; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-09-29 15:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Boaz Harrosh; +Cc: viro, bhalevy, osd-dev, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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)) {
> >
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] fs/ubifs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-29 13:57 ` [PATCH] " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-30 8:11 ` Richard Weinberger
2015-10-01 13:35 ` Artem Bityutskiy
0 siblings, 1 reply; 38+ messages in thread
From: Richard Weinberger @ 2015-09-30 8:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaowei Bai
Cc: Al Viro, Artem Bityutskiy, Adrian Hunter, linux-mtd, linux-fsdevel, LKML
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 05/17] fs/exofs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-29 15:46 ` Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-09-30 10:26 ` Boaz Harrosh
0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: Boaz Harrosh @ 2015-09-30 10:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaowei Bai, Al Viro, Andrew Morton; +Cc: osd-dev, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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)) {
>>>
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 09/17] fs/hpfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-29 15:03 ` Mikulas Patocka
@ 2015-09-30 11:13 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-10-01 20:49 ` Mikulas Patocka
0 siblings, 1 reply; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-09-30 11:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mikulas Patocka; +Cc: viro, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
> >
> >
> >
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] fs/ubifs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-30 8:11 ` Richard Weinberger
@ 2015-10-01 13:35 ` Artem Bityutskiy
0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: Artem Bityutskiy @ 2015-10-01 13:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Weinberger, Yaowei Bai
Cc: Al Viro, Adrian Hunter, linux-mtd, linux-fsdevel, LKML
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>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 09/17] fs/hpfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-30 11:13 ` Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-10-01 20:49 ` Mikulas Patocka
2015-10-08 12:22 ` Yaowei Bai
0 siblings, 1 reply; 38+ messages in thread
From: Mikulas Patocka @ 2015-10-01 20:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaowei Bai; +Cc: viro, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 09/17] fs/hpfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-10-01 20:49 ` Mikulas Patocka
@ 2015-10-08 12:22 ` Yaowei Bai
0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-10-08 12:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mikulas Patocka; +Cc: viro, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 05/17] fs/exofs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-29 13:47 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-09-29 15:46 ` Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-10-08 12:29 ` Yaowei Bai
1 sibling, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-10-08 12:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Boaz Harrosh; +Cc: viro, bhalevy, osd-dev, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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)) {
> >
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 07/17] fs/ext4: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-09-28 13:50 ` [PATCH 07/17] fs/ext4: " Yaowei Bai
@ 2015-10-29 18:09 ` Theodore Ts'o
2015-10-30 1:38 ` Yaowei Bai
0 siblings, 1 reply; 38+ messages in thread
From: Theodore Ts'o @ 2015-10-29 18:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaowei Bai; +Cc: viro, adilger.kernel, linux-ext4, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 07/17] fs/ext4: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check
2015-10-29 18:09 ` Theodore Ts'o
@ 2015-10-30 1:38 ` Yaowei Bai
0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: Yaowei Bai @ 2015-10-30 1:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Theodore Ts'o, viro, adilger.kernel, linux-ext4,
linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
Cc: akpm
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-10-30 1:42 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2015-09-28 13:26 [PATCH 00/17] cleanups of fs about new/huge_valid_dev Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 13:29 ` [PATCH 01/17] fs/kdev_t: remove unused huge_valid_dev function Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 13:29 ` [PATCH 02/17] fs/kdev_t: old/new_valid_dev can be boolean Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 13:34 ` [PATCH 03/17] fs/vfs: remove unnecessary new_valid_dev check Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 13:39 ` [PATCH 04/17] fs/btrfs: " Yaowei Bai
2015-09-29 14:55 ` David Sterba
2015-09-28 13:43 ` [PATCH 05/17] fs/exofs: " Yaowei Bai
2015-09-29 13:47 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-09-29 15:46 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-09-30 10:26 ` Boaz Harrosh
2015-10-08 12:29 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 13:47 ` [PATCH 06/17] fs/ext2: " Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 13:50 ` [PATCH 07/17] fs/ext4: " Yaowei Bai
2015-10-29 18:09 ` Theodore Ts'o
2015-10-30 1:38 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 13:55 ` [PATCH 08/17] fs/f2fs: " Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 14:11 ` [PATCH 09/17] fs/hpfs: " Yaowei Bai
2015-09-29 15:03 ` Mikulas Patocka
2015-09-30 11:13 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-10-01 20:49 ` Mikulas Patocka
2015-10-08 12:22 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 14:15 ` [PATCH 10/17] fs/jffs2: " Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 23:20 ` Brian Norris
2015-09-28 14:18 ` [PATCH 11/17] fs/jfs: " Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 15:42 ` [Jfs-discussion] " Dave Kleikamp
2015-09-28 14:21 ` [PATCH 06/17] fs/ext2: " Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 14:25 ` [PATCH 12/17] fs/ncpfs: " Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 14:30 ` [PATCH 13/17] fs/nfs: " Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 14:33 ` [PATCH 14/17] fs/nilfs2: " Yaowei Bai
2015-09-29 14:51 ` Ryusuke Konishi
2015-09-28 14:47 ` [PATCH 15/17] fs/reiserfs: " Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 14:50 ` [PATCH 16/17] fs/stat: " Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 14:53 ` [PATCH 17/17] fs/ubifs: " Yaowei Bai
2015-09-28 19:20 ` Richard Weinberger
2015-09-29 13:43 ` Yaowei Bai
2015-09-29 13:57 ` [PATCH] " Yaowei Bai
2015-09-30 8:11 ` Richard Weinberger
2015-10-01 13:35 ` Artem Bityutskiy
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).