On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 10:05:23AM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 10:34:42AM +1100, David Chinner wrote:
> >
> > Clean up most outstanding sparse warnings.
> >
> > These are mostly locking annotations, marking things static,
> > casts where needed and declaring stuff in header files.
>
> Nice. Note that once we start on making things static there's also a lot
> of things not really used non-static but exported which we should cleanup
> aswell. I'll look at that when I get some time.
>
> Note that we'll also always get tons of sparse warnings for debug builds
> because STATIC is defined away..
Yeah, I noticed that - but given that we've done that on purpose to
aid debugging, I don't think it will change ;)
> > @@ -2733,21 +2733,13 @@ xlog_recover_do_efd_trans(
> > * AIL lock.
> > */
> > xfs_trans_delete_ail(mp, lip);
> > - break;
> > + xfs_efi_item_free(efip);
> > + return;
> > }
> > }
> > lip = xfs_trans_next_ail(mp, lip, &gen, NULL);
> > }
> > -
> > - /*
> > - * If we found it, then free it up. If it wasn't there, it
> > - * must have been overwritten in the log. Oh well.
> > - */
> > - if (lip != NULL) {
> > - xfs_efi_item_free(efip);
> > - } else {
> > - spin_unlock(&mp->m_ail_lock);
> > - }
> > + spin_unlock(&mp->m_ail_lock);
>
> Imho non-trivial changes like this hunk always deserve beeing a patch of
> it's own where they're described in details.
Ok, I'll split that one out.
> Note that I also get warnings from the lock annotations prover in sparse
> about some conditional locking in xfs_mount.c. I have patches I still need
> to run through testing for those which clean the code up quite nicely aswell.
Oh, yeah, I left a couple in the icsb code alone as they'd require more than
trivial annotation to fix. I just wanted to remove the majority of the
noise so I could see new problems easily. Patches to fix them would be great
;)
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
Principal Engineer
SGI Australian Software Group
|