This seems like a good and proper patch to me, and simple too.
But like all changes, it needs tested. While I was testing it, I
discovered a regression in the associated userspace code. I
"bisected" (we use SVN for the userspace part of Orangefs)
down to the commit that caused the regression, and some
of the userspace folks are going to fix it.
I don't think I should ask Linus to pull this patch until I can
test it. Since we're about to go into rc7, it might not go in
until the next go around...
-Mike
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 10:49 AM, Martin Brandenburg
<mar...@omnibond.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Nov 2016, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
>
>> The "perf_counter_reset" case has already been handled above.
>> Moreover "ORANGEFS_PARAM_REQUEST_OP_READAHEAD_COUNT_SIZE" is not a really
>> consistent.
>> It is likely that this (dead) code is a cut and paste left over.
>
> That's exactly what this is.
>
> Reviewed-by: Martin Brandenburg <mar...@omnibond.com>
>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jail...@wanadoo.fr>
>> ---
>> fs/orangefs/orangefs-sysfs.c | 9 ---------
>> 1 file changed, 9 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/orangefs/orangefs-sysfs.c b/fs/orangefs/orangefs-sysfs.c
>> index a799546a67f7..084954448f18 100644
>> --- a/fs/orangefs/orangefs-sysfs.c
>> +++ b/fs/orangefs/orangefs-sysfs.c
>> @@ -609,15 +609,6 @@ static ssize_t sysfs_service_op_store(struct kobject
>> *kobj,
>> new_op->upcall.req.param.u.value32[0] = val1;
>> new_op->upcall.req.param.u.value32[1] = val2;
>> goto value_set;
>> - } else if (!strcmp(attr->attr.name,
>> - "perf_counter_reset")) {
>> - if ((val > 0)) {
>> - new_op->upcall.req.param.op =
>> - ORANGEFS_PARAM_REQUEST_OP_READAHEAD_COUNT_SIZE;
>> - } else {
>> - rc = 0;
>> - goto out;
>> - }
>> }
>>
>> } else if (!strcmp(kobj->name, ACACHE_KOBJ_ID)) {
>> --
>> 2.9.3
>>
>>
