xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] xfs: remove unneeded ASSERT from xfs_itruncate_extents

To: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: remove unneeded ASSERT from xfs_itruncate_extents
From: Carlos Maiolino <cmaiolino@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:26:28 -0500
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <510687B4.7000902@xxxxxxx>
References: <1359381870-30908-1-git-send-email-cmaiolino@xxxxxxxxxx> <510687B4.7000902@xxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Meh, you're right, cheated by my eyes.

but the suggestion looks nice to avoid another ones to fall in the same mistake,
will send a change to it, thanks Mark


On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 08:14:12AM -0600, Mark Tinguely wrote:
> On 01/28/13 08:04, Carlos Maiolino wrote:
> >There is no reason to ASSERT(xfs_isilocked(ip, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL)); twice, so,
> >remove one of these ASSERT calls
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Carlos Maiolino<cmaiolino@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >---
> >  fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c | 3 +--
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> >diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
> >index 66282dc..25226ea 100644
> >--- a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
> >+++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
> >@@ -1396,8 +1396,7 @@ xfs_itruncate_extents(
> >     int                     done = 0;
> >
> >     ASSERT(xfs_isilocked(ip, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL));
> >-    ASSERT(!atomic_read(&VFS_I(ip)->i_count) ||
> >-           xfs_isilocked(ip, XFS_IOLOCK_EXCL));
> >+    ASSERT(!atomic_read(&VFS_I(ip)->i_count));
> >     ASSERT(new_size<= XFS_ISIZE(ip));
> >     ASSERT(tp->t_flags&  XFS_TRANS_PERM_LOG_RES);
> >     ASSERT(ip->i_itemp != NULL);
> 
> You removed an XFS_IOLOCK_EXCL assert not a duplicate
> XFS_ILOCK_EXCL assert. It maybe more obvious if the
> first assert read:
> 
>       ASSERT(xfs_isilocked(ip, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL) ||
>              xfs_isilocked(ip, XFS_IOLOCK_EXCL));
>       ASSERT(!atomic_read(&VFS_I(ip)->i_count));
> ...
> 
> --Mark Tinguely.

-- 
Carlos

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>