Re: [PATCH][next] io_uring: Remove logically dead code in io_splice

2020-05-04 Thread Gustavo A. R. Silva
On 5/4/20 10:25, Jens Axboe wrote: >> diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c >> index e5dfbbd2aa34..4b1efb062f7f 100644 >> --- a/fs/io_uring.c >> +++ b/fs/io_uring.c >> @@ -2782,7 +2782,7 @@ static int io_splice(struct io_kiocb *req, bool >> force_nonblock) >> poff_in = (sp->off_in ==

Re: [PATCH][next] io_uring: Remove logically dead code in io_splice

2020-05-04 Thread Pavel Begunkov
On 04/05/2020 18:25, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 5/4/20 9:19 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: >> In case force_nonblock happens to be true, the function returns >> at: >> >> 2779 if (force_nonblock) >> 2780 return -EAGAIN; >> >> before reaching this line of code. So, the null che

Re: [PATCH][next] io_uring: Remove logically dead code in io_splice

2020-05-04 Thread Jens Axboe
On 5/4/20 9:19 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > In case force_nonblock happens to be true, the function returns > at: > > 2779 if (force_nonblock) > 2780 return -EAGAIN; > > before reaching this line of code. So, the null check on force_nonblock > at 2785, is never actua

Re: [PATCH][next] io_uring: Remove logically dead code in io_splice

2020-05-04 Thread Pavel Begunkov
On 04/05/2020 18:19, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > In case force_nonblock happens to be true, the function returns > at: > > 2779 if (force_nonblock) > 2780 return -EAGAIN; > > before reaching this line of code. So, the null check on force_nonblock > at 2785, is never act

[PATCH][next] io_uring: Remove logically dead code in io_splice

2020-05-04 Thread Gustavo A. R. Silva
In case force_nonblock happens to be true, the function returns at: 2779 if (force_nonblock) 2780 return -EAGAIN; before reaching this line of code. So, the null check on force_nonblock at 2785, is never actually being executed. Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1492838 ("Logicall