Hi Bob, Bob Peterson wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > >> We don't need the redundant logic since send_message always returns 0. >> >> Signed-off-by: Guoqing Jiang <gqji...@suse.com> >> --- >> fs/dlm/lock.c | 10 ++-------- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/dlm/lock.c b/fs/dlm/lock.c >> index 35502d4..6fc3de9 100644 >> --- a/fs/dlm/lock.c >> +++ b/fs/dlm/lock.c >> @@ -3656,10 +3656,7 @@ static int send_common(struct dlm_rsb *r, struct >> dlm_lkb *lkb, int mstype) >> >> send_args(r, lkb, ms); >> >> - error = send_message(mh, ms); >> - if (error) >> - goto fail; >> - return 0; >> + return send_message(mh, ms); >> >> fail: >> remove_from_waiters(lkb, msg_reply_type(mstype)); >> @@ -3763,10 +3760,7 @@ static int send_lookup(struct dlm_rsb *r, struct >> dlm_lkb *lkb) >> >> send_args(r, lkb, ms); >> >> - error = send_message(mh, ms); >> - if (error) >> - goto fail; >> - return 0; >> + return send_message(mh, ms); >> >> fail: >> remove_from_waiters(lkb, DLM_MSG_LOOKUP_REPLY); >> -- >> 1.7.12.4 >> > > Hi, > > The patch looks okay, but if remove_from_waiters() always returns 0, > wouldn't it be better to change the function from int to void and > return 0 here? The advantage is that code spelunkers wouldn't need > to back-track one more level (not to mention the instruction or two > it might save). > > Seems remove_from_waiters is not always returns 0, the return value could be -1 or 0 which depends on _remove_from_waiters.
BTW, I found that there are no big difference between send_common and send_lookup, since the send_common can also be use to send lookup message, I guess send_lookup can be removed as well. Thanks, Guoqing