Note that fscache_operation_valid() may return NULL, but we do not care
about it, that is to say the validity checking is needless.

Actually, there's a call to fscache_begin_operation() beforehand, which
will make sure the resources are usable for the subsequent operations.
And we have already called ops->prepare_write() before fscache_write().

Signed-off-by: Yue Hu <huy...@coolpad.com>
---
 include/linux/fscache.h | 9 ++++-----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/fscache.h b/include/linux/fscache.h
index 72585c9729a2..8045497c6515 100644
--- a/include/linux/fscache.h
+++ b/include/linux/fscache.h
@@ -510,9 +510,8 @@ int fscache_read(struct netfs_cache_resources *cres,
                 netfs_io_terminated_t term_func,
                 void *term_func_priv)
 {
-       const struct netfs_cache_ops *ops = fscache_operation_valid(cres);
-       return ops->read(cres, start_pos, iter, read_hole,
-                        term_func, term_func_priv);
+       return cres->ops->read(cres, start_pos, iter, read_hole, term_func,
+                              term_func_priv);
 }
 
 /**
@@ -568,8 +567,8 @@ int fscache_write(struct netfs_cache_resources *cres,
                  netfs_io_terminated_t term_func,
                  void *term_func_priv)
 {
-       const struct netfs_cache_ops *ops = fscache_operation_valid(cres);
-       return ops->write(cres, start_pos, iter, term_func, term_func_priv);
+       return cres->ops->write(cres, start_pos, iter, term_func,
+                               term_func_priv);
 }
 
 /**
-- 
2.17.1
--
Linux-cachefs mailing list
Linux-cachefs@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cachefs

Reply via email to