Thanks for the reply.
On 2024/2/29 21:40, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-02-29 at 17:41 +0800, [email protected] wrote:
>> From: Kunwu Chan <[email protected]>
>>
>> Use the KMEM_CACHE() macro instead of kmem_cache_create() to simplify
>> the creation of SLAB caches when the default values are used.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kunwu Chan <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> fs/nfs/write.c | 5 +----
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/nfs/write.c b/fs/nfs/write.c
>> index bb79d3a886ae..6a75772d447f 100644
>> --- a/fs/nfs/write.c
>> +++ b/fs/nfs/write.c
>> @@ -2148,10 +2148,7 @@ int __init nfs_init_writepagecache(void)
>> if (nfs_wdata_mempool == NULL)
>> goto out_destroy_write_cache;
>>
>> - nfs_cdata_cachep = kmem_cache_create("nfs_commit_data",
>> - sizeof(struct
>> nfs_commit_data),
>> - 0, SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN,
>> - NULL);
>> + nfs_cdata_cachep = KMEM_CACHE(nfs_commit_data,
>> SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN);
>> if (nfs_cdata_cachep == NULL)
>> goto out_destroy_write_mempool;
>
> If this were being done as part of an actual functional code change,
> then I'd be OK with it, but otherwise it is just unnecessary churn that
> gets in the way of back porting any future fixes.
It's just my personal opinion, I meant to do some cleanup. It's not
entirely necessary either, as everyone prefers a different style of
code. It doesn't matter.
>
>
--
Thanks,
Kunwu