On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 03:50:13PM -0500, Connor Kuehl wrote: > On 5/11/21 4:37 PM, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > There is no reason to set it in label "err". We should be able to set > > it right after sending reply. It is easier to read. > > > > Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgo...@redhat.com> > > --- > > tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c | 5 +---- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c b/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c > > index aa53808ef9..b1767dd5b9 100644 > > --- a/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c > > +++ b/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c > > @@ -446,12 +446,9 @@ int virtio_send_data_iov(struct fuse_session *se, > > struct fuse_chan *ch, > > vu_queue_notify(dev, q); > > pthread_mutex_unlock(&qi->vq_lock); > > vu_dispatch_unlock(qi->virtio_dev); > > + req->reply_sent = true; > > > > err: > > Just a really minor comment: after all these changes, I would venture > that "out" is a more appropriate label name than "err" at this point.
May be. This path is used both by error path as well as success path. Just that value of "ret" changes. I am not particular about it. So I will change this to "out". Thanks Vivek > > > - if (ret == 0) { > > - req->reply_sent = true; > > - } > > - > > return ret; > > } > > > > >