The declarations were introduced with the file, but the declared
variables were not used.
Fixes: 65294c1f2c5e ("nfsd: add a new struct file caching facility to nfsd")
Signed-off-by: Mao Wenan <[email protected]>
---
fs/nfsd/filecache.c | 2 --
1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/nfsd/filecache.c b/fs/nfsd/filecache.c
index ef55e9b..32a9bf2 100644
--- a/fs/nfsd/filecache.c
+++ b/fs/nfsd/filecache.c
@@ -685,8 +685,6 @@ nfsd_file_cache_purge(struct net *net)
void
nfsd_file_cache_shutdown(void)
{
- LIST_HEAD(dispose);
-
set_bit(NFSD_FILE_SHUTDOWN, &nfsd_file_lru_flags);
lease_unregister_notifier(&nfsd_file_lease_notifier);
--
2.7.4
On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 09:36:27AM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote:
> Hi Mao-
>
> > On Nov 1, 2019, at 7:40 AM, Mao Wenan <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > The declarations were introduced with the file, but the declared
> > variables were not used.
> >
> > Fixes: 65294c1f2c5e ("nfsd: add a new struct file caching facility to nfsd")
>
> I'm not sure a Fixes: tag is necessary here? 65294c1f2c5e
> works fine without this change, and it's not something we
> would need to backport into stable kernels.
>
> This is more of a clean up patch.
>
Fixes is not really related to backports or stable. I would agree that
this isn't a bug but just a cleanup, but the problem is that other
people want Fixes tags for everything...
Yesterday I sent a cleanup patch and I almost put the Fixes tag under
the --- cut off but in the end I just deleted it... It's hard to know
what the right thing is.
regards,
dan carpenter
On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 05:49:21PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 09:36:27AM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote:
> > > On Nov 1, 2019, at 7:40 AM, Mao Wenan <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > The declarations were introduced with the file, but the declared
> > > variables were not used.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 65294c1f2c5e ("nfsd: add a new struct file caching facility to nfsd")
Thanks, applying for 5.5.
> > I'm not sure a Fixes: tag is necessary here? 65294c1f2c5e
> > works fine without this change, and it's not something we
> > would need to backport into stable kernels.
> >
> > This is more of a clean up patch.
> >
>
> Fixes is not really related to backports or stable. I would agree that
> this isn't a bug but just a cleanup, but the problem is that other
> people want Fixes tags for everything...
>
> Yesterday I sent a cleanup patch and I almost put the Fixes tag under
> the --- cut off but in the end I just deleted it... It's hard to know
> what the right thing is.
It doesn't have a stable cc and it's pretty obvious cleanup, so I guess
there's no harm in it.
I could go either way. But I'll leave the patch as is unless someone
comes up with a clear policy.
--b.