The return value of cgroup_rm_cftypes_locked() is always 0. So remove
it to simplify the code. No functional change intended.
Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin <[email protected]>
---
kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c | 9 +++------
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c b/kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c
index bfe3cd8ccf36..b0d98542eea2 100644
--- a/kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c
+++ b/kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c
@@ -4320,14 +4320,13 @@ static int cgroup_init_cftypes(struct cgroup_subsys *ss, struct cftype *cfts)
return ret;
}
-static int cgroup_rm_cftypes_locked(struct cftype *cfts)
+static void cgroup_rm_cftypes_locked(struct cftype *cfts)
{
lockdep_assert_held(&cgroup_mutex);
list_del(&cfts->node);
cgroup_apply_cftypes(cfts, false);
cgroup_exit_cftypes(cfts);
- return 0;
}
/**
@@ -4343,8 +4342,6 @@ static int cgroup_rm_cftypes_locked(struct cftype *cfts)
*/
int cgroup_rm_cftypes(struct cftype *cfts)
{
- int ret;
-
if (!cfts || cfts[0].name[0] == '\0')
return 0;
@@ -4352,9 +4349,9 @@ int cgroup_rm_cftypes(struct cftype *cfts)
return -ENOENT;
cgroup_lock();
- ret = cgroup_rm_cftypes_locked(cfts);
+ cgroup_rm_cftypes_locked(cfts);
cgroup_unlock();
- return ret;
+ return 0;
}
/**
--
2.33.0
Hi.
On Sat, Jul 01, 2023 at 03:38:56PM +0800, Miaohe Lin <[email protected]> wrote:
> The return value of cgroup_rm_cftypes_locked() is always 0. So remove
> it to simplify the code. No functional change intended.
I'd add a comment that it builds upon cgroup_addrm_files()'s:
> For removals, this function never fails.
> Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin <[email protected]>
> ---
> kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c | 9 +++------
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
Reviewed-by: Michal Koutn? <[email protected]>
On Sat, Jul 01, 2023 at 03:38:56PM +0800, Miaohe Lin wrote:
> The return value of cgroup_rm_cftypes_locked() is always 0. So remove
> it to simplify the code. No functional change intended.
>
> Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin <[email protected]>
Applied to cgroup/for-6.6. Please feel free to follow up with the comment
addition Michal suggested.
Thanks.
--
tejun
On 2023/7/10 23:46, Michal Koutn? wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Sat, Jul 01, 2023 at 03:38:56PM +0800, Miaohe Lin <[email protected]> wrote:
>> The return value of cgroup_rm_cftypes_locked() is always 0. So remove
>> it to simplify the code. No functional change intended.
>
> I'd add a comment that it builds upon cgroup_addrm_files()'s:
Do you mean something like below:
diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c b/kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c
index b0d98542eea2..2c02f319a7d4 100644
--- a/kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c
+++ b/kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c
@@ -4320,6 +4320,7 @@ static int cgroup_init_cftypes(struct cgroup_subsys *ss, struct cftype *cfts)
return ret;
}
+/* It builds upon cgroup_addrm_files()'s. */
static void cgroup_rm_cftypes_locked(struct cftype *cfts)
{
lockdep_assert_held(&cgroup_mutex);
>> For removals, this function never fails.
>
>> Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c | 9 +++------
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> Reviewed-by: Michal Koutn? <[email protected]>
Thanks for review and suggestion.
On 2023/7/11 3:40, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 01, 2023 at 03:38:56PM +0800, Miaohe Lin wrote:
>> The return value of cgroup_rm_cftypes_locked() is always 0. So remove
>> it to simplify the code. No functional change intended.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin <[email protected]>
>
> Applied to cgroup/for-6.6. Please feel free to follow up with the comment
> addition Michal suggested.
Should I send a v2 patch or a separate patch? Both is fine to me.
Thanks for your work.
On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 10:58:48AM +0800, Miaohe Lin <[email protected]> wrote:
> +/* It builds upon cgroup_addrm_files()'s. */
> static void cgroup_rm_cftypes_locked(struct cftype *cfts)
> {
> lockdep_assert_held(&cgroup_mutex);
>
I meant adding the reasoning to the commit message -- swallowing errors
on removal is fine because cgroup_addrm_files() won't fail at removal.
It's a minor remark for the future readers ;-)
Michal
On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 11:00:58AM +0800, Miaohe Lin wrote:
> On 2023/7/11 3:40, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 01, 2023 at 03:38:56PM +0800, Miaohe Lin wrote:
> >> The return value of cgroup_rm_cftypes_locked() is always 0. So remove
> >> it to simplify the code. No functional change intended.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin <[email protected]>
> >
> > Applied to cgroup/for-6.6. Please feel free to follow up with the comment
> > addition Michal suggested.
>
> Should I send a v2 patch or a separate patch? Both is fine to me.
Please send a separate patch.
Thanks.
--
tejun
On 2023/7/12 5:40, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 11:00:58AM +0800, Miaohe Lin wrote:
>> On 2023/7/11 3:40, Tejun Heo wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jul 01, 2023 at 03:38:56PM +0800, Miaohe Lin wrote:
>>>> The return value of cgroup_rm_cftypes_locked() is always 0. So remove
>>>> it to simplify the code. No functional change intended.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> Applied to cgroup/for-6.6. Please feel free to follow up with the comment
>>> addition Michal suggested.
>>
>> Should I send a v2 patch or a separate patch? Both is fine to me.
>
> Please send a separate patch.
I see. But since Michal is meant adding the reasoning to the commit message, it seems
a v2 patch is required. Or could you help modify the commit message? It should looks
like:
"
The return value of cgroup_rm_cftypes_locked() is always 0 and swallowing
errors on removal is fine because cgroup_addrm_files() won't fail at
removal. So remove return value to simplify the code. No functional
change intended.
"
Thanks a lot.