__loop_release() has a single call site. Fold it there. This is
currently not a huge win but it will make following replacement of
loop_index_mutex more obvious.

Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <j...@suse.cz>
---
 drivers/block/loop.c | 16 +++++++---------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/block/loop.c b/drivers/block/loop.c
index d0f1b7106572..cc43d835fe6f 100644
--- a/drivers/block/loop.c
+++ b/drivers/block/loop.c
@@ -1642,12 +1642,15 @@ static int lo_open(struct block_device *bdev, fmode_t 
mode)
        return err;
 }
 
-static void __lo_release(struct loop_device *lo)
+static void lo_release(struct gendisk *disk, fmode_t mode)
 {
+       struct loop_device *lo;
        int err;
 
+       mutex_lock(&loop_index_mutex);
+       lo = disk->private_data;
        if (atomic_dec_return(&lo->lo_refcnt))
-               return;
+               goto unlock_index;
 
        mutex_lock(&loop_ctl_mutex);
        if (lo->lo_flags & LO_FLAGS_AUTOCLEAR) {
@@ -1657,7 +1660,7 @@ static void __lo_release(struct loop_device *lo)
                 */
                err = loop_clr_fd(lo);
                if (!err)
-                       return;
+                       goto unlock_index;
        } else if (lo->lo_state == Lo_bound) {
                /*
                 * Otherwise keep thread (if running) and config,
@@ -1668,12 +1671,7 @@ static void __lo_release(struct loop_device *lo)
        }
 
        mutex_unlock(&loop_ctl_mutex);
-}
-
-static void lo_release(struct gendisk *disk, fmode_t mode)
-{
-       mutex_lock(&loop_index_mutex);
-       __lo_release(disk->private_data);
+unlock_index:
        mutex_unlock(&loop_index_mutex);
 }
 
-- 
2.16.4

Reply via email to