On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 02:06:59PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 22:02:09 -0500 Theodore Ts'o [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
+int ext4_get_blocks_wrap(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode, sector_t
block,
+ unsigned long max_blocks, struct buffer_head *bh,
+ int create, int extend_disksize)
+{
+ int retval;
+ if (create) {
+ down_write((EXT4_I(inode)-i_data_sem));
+ } else {
+ down_read((EXT4_I(inode)-i_data_sem));
+ }
+ if (EXT4_I(inode)-i_flags EXT4_EXTENTS_FL) {
+ retval = ext4_ext_get_blocks(handle, inode, block, max_blocks,
+ bh, create, extend_disksize);
+ } else {
+ retval = ext4_get_blocks_handle(handle, inode, block,
+ max_blocks, bh, create, extend_disksize);
+ }
+ if (create) {
+ up_write((EXT4_I(inode)-i_data_sem));
+ } else {
+ up_read((EXT4_I(inode)-i_data_sem));
+ }
This function has many unneeded braces. checkpatch used to detect this
but it seems to have broken.
This is a side effect of this rule:
This does not apply if one branch of a conditional statement
is a single statement. Use braces in both branches.
Basically each arm is being considered in isolation, each arm is seen as
having a sibling arm with braces so it is permitted to have braces.
Bugger.
I guess I'll try and see if I can detect this.
+ return retval;
+}
static int ext4_get_block(struct inode *inode, sector_t iblock,
struct buffer_head *bh_result, int create)
Mising newline.
We could check for those ... will look to add in the next release.
-apw
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-ext4 in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
