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 <bywxiao...@163.com>
>
> ACK-by: Boaz Harrosh <o...@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)) {
> >
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
