On Tue, 2017-11-21 at 11:04 +0800, piaojun wrote: > > > new = NULL; > > > unlock: > > > spin_unlock(&oi->ip_lock); > > > @@ -2246,7 +2250,7 @@ static int ocfs2_dio_get_block(struct inode > > > *inode, sector_t iblock, > > > ue->ue_phys = desc->c_phys; > > > > > > list_splice_tail_init(&wc->w_unwritten_list, > > > &dwc->dw_zero_list); > > > - dwc->dw_zero_count++; > > > + dwc->dw_zero_count += wc->w_unwritten_count; > > I prefer using a loop to calculate 'dwc->dw_zero_count' rather than > introducing a new variable as below: > > list_for_each(iter, &wc->w_unwritten_list) > dwc->dw_zero_count++;
If you want to iterate through the list to calculate the length rather than tracking the length as the list grows, it would make more sense to remove dw_zero_count. If you'd prefer walking all of the elements to calculate the length, this can just be done in ocfs2_dio_end_io_write() where the length of the list is actually used. I assumed that the intent of dw_zero_count was to avoid an unnecessary iteration through dw_zero_list to determine the length.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Ocfs2-devel mailing list Ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com https://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-devel
