Drop LIST_HEAD where the variable it declares is never used.
---
drivers/dma/at_hdmac.c | 5 -----
drivers/dma/dw/core.c | 1 -
drivers/dma/pl330.c | 1 -
drivers/dma/sa11x0-dma.c | 2 --
drivers/dma/st_fdma.c | 3 ---
drivers/infiniband/ulp/ipoib/ipoib_ib.c | 1 -
drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/resource_tracker.c | 5 -----
drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_tc.c | 3 ---
drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum.c | 1 -
drivers/net/wireless/st/cw1200/queue.c | 1 -
drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_nvme.c | 2 --
drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_scsi.c | 2 --
drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c | 1 -
drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_init.c | 1 -
drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_dev_frontend.c | 2 --
fs/btrfs/relocation.c | 1 -
fs/nfs/nfs4client.c | 1 -
fs/nfsd/nfs4layouts.c | 1 -
fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c | 1 -
fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c | 1 -
20 files changed, 36 deletions(-)
Drop LIST_HEAD where the variable it declares is never used.
This was introduced in c5c707f96fc9a ("nfsd: implement pNFS
layout recalls"), but was not used even in that commit.
The semantic patch that fixes this problem is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
// <smpl>
@@
identifier x;
@@
- LIST_HEAD(x);
... when != x
// </smpl>
Fixes: c5c707f96fc9a ("nfsd: implement pNFS layout recalls")
Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <[email protected]>
---
Successfully 0-day tested on 151 configurations.
fs/nfsd/nfs4layouts.c | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4layouts.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4layouts.c
index 2b36aa037ce0..44517fb5c0de 100644
--- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4layouts.c
+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4layouts.c
@@ -656,7 +656,6 @@ nfsd4_cb_layout_done(struct nfsd4_callback *cb, struct rpc_task *task)
struct nfsd_net *nn;
ktime_t now, cutoff;
const struct nfsd4_layout_ops *ops;
- LIST_HEAD(reaplist);
switch (task->tk_status) {
Drop LIST_HEAD where the variable it declares has never
been used.
The semantic patch that fixes this problem is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
// <smpl>
@@
identifier x;
@@
- LIST_HEAD(x);
... when != x
// </smpl>
Fixes: 0e20162ed1e9 ("NFSv4.1 Use MDS auth flavor for data server connection")
Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <[email protected]>
---
Successfully 0-day tested on 151 configurations.
fs/nfs/nfs4client.c | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4client.c b/fs/nfs/nfs4client.c
index 2548405da1f7..735c1056a91c 100644
--- a/fs/nfs/nfs4client.c
+++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4client.c
@@ -145,7 +145,6 @@ static void
nfs4_shutdown_ds_clients(struct nfs_client *clp)
{
struct nfs4_ds_server *dss;
- LIST_HEAD(shutdown_list);
while (!list_empty(&clp->cl_ds_clients)) {
dss = list_entry(clp->cl_ds_clients.next,
Applied, thanks.--b.
On Sun, Dec 23, 2018 at 09:56:56AM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> Drop LIST_HEAD where the variable it declares is never used.
>
> This was introduced in c5c707f96fc9a ("nfsd: implement pNFS
> layout recalls"), but was not used even in that commit.
>
> The semantic patch that fixes this problem is as follows:
> (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
>
> // <smpl>
> @@
> identifier x;
> @@
> - LIST_HEAD(x);
> ... when != x
> // </smpl>
>
> Fixes: c5c707f96fc9a ("nfsd: implement pNFS layout recalls")
> Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <[email protected]>
>
> ---
> Successfully 0-day tested on 151 configurations.
>
> fs/nfsd/nfs4layouts.c | 1 -
> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4layouts.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4layouts.c
> index 2b36aa037ce0..44517fb5c0de 100644
> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4layouts.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4layouts.c
> @@ -656,7 +656,6 @@ nfsd4_cb_layout_done(struct nfsd4_callback *cb, struct rpc_task *task)
> struct nfsd_net *nn;
> ktime_t now, cutoff;
> const struct nfsd4_layout_ops *ops;
> - LIST_HEAD(reaplist);
>
>
> switch (task->tk_status) {
Why do you CC this to so many lists?
On 23/12/2018, Julia Lawall <[email protected]> wrote:
> Drop LIST_HEAD where the variable it declares is never used.
>
> ---
>
> drivers/dma/at_hdmac.c | 5 -----
> drivers/dma/dw/core.c | 1 -
> drivers/dma/pl330.c | 1 -
> drivers/dma/sa11x0-dma.c | 2 --
> drivers/dma/st_fdma.c | 3 ---
> drivers/infiniband/ulp/ipoib/ipoib_ib.c | 1 -
> drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/resource_tracker.c | 5 -----
> drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_tc.c | 3 ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum.c | 1 -
> drivers/net/wireless/st/cw1200/queue.c | 1 -
> drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_nvme.c | 2 --
> drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_scsi.c | 2 --
> drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c | 1 -
> drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_init.c | 1 -
> drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_dev_frontend.c | 2 --
> fs/btrfs/relocation.c | 1 -
> fs/nfs/nfs4client.c | 1 -
> fs/nfsd/nfs4layouts.c | 1 -
> fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c | 1 -
> fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c | 1 -
> 20 files changed, 36 deletions(-)
>
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018, Tom Psyborg wrote:
> Why do you CC this to so many lists?
Because the different files are in different subsystems. The cover letter
goes to a list for each file, or to a person if there is no list. The
patches go to the people and lists associated with the affected files.
julia
>
> On 23/12/2018, Julia Lawall <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Drop LIST_HEAD where the variable it declares is never used.
> >
> > ---
> >
> > drivers/dma/at_hdmac.c | 5 -----
> > drivers/dma/dw/core.c | 1 -
> > drivers/dma/pl330.c | 1 -
> > drivers/dma/sa11x0-dma.c | 2 --
> > drivers/dma/st_fdma.c | 3 ---
> > drivers/infiniband/ulp/ipoib/ipoib_ib.c | 1 -
> > drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/resource_tracker.c | 5 -----
> > drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_tc.c | 3 ---
> > drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum.c | 1 -
> > drivers/net/wireless/st/cw1200/queue.c | 1 -
> > drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_nvme.c | 2 --
> > drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_scsi.c | 2 --
> > drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c | 1 -
> > drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_init.c | 1 -
> > drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_dev_frontend.c | 2 --
> > fs/btrfs/relocation.c | 1 -
> > fs/nfs/nfs4client.c | 1 -
> > fs/nfsd/nfs4layouts.c | 1 -
> > fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c | 1 -
> > fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c | 1 -
> > 20 files changed, 36 deletions(-)
> >
>
there was discussion about this just some days ago. CC 4-5 lists is
more than enough
On 23/12/2018, Julia Lawall <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 23 Dec 2018, Tom Psyborg wrote:
>
>> Why do you CC this to so many lists?
>
> Because the different files are in different subsystems. The cover letter
> goes to a list for each file, or to a person if there is no list. The
> patches go to the people and lists associated with the affected files.
>
> julia
>
>>
>> On 23/12/2018, Julia Lawall <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > Drop LIST_HEAD where the variable it declares is never used.
>> >
>> > ---
>> >
>> > drivers/dma/at_hdmac.c | 5 -----
>> > drivers/dma/dw/core.c | 1 -
>> > drivers/dma/pl330.c | 1 -
>> > drivers/dma/sa11x0-dma.c | 2 --
>> > drivers/dma/st_fdma.c | 3 ---
>> > drivers/infiniband/ulp/ipoib/ipoib_ib.c | 1 -
>> > drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/resource_tracker.c | 5 -----
>> > drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_tc.c | 3 ---
>> > drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum.c | 1 -
>> > drivers/net/wireless/st/cw1200/queue.c | 1 -
>> > drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_nvme.c | 2 --
>> > drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_scsi.c | 2 --
>> > drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c | 1 -
>> > drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_init.c | 1 -
>> > drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_dev_frontend.c | 2 --
>> > fs/btrfs/relocation.c | 1 -
>> > fs/nfs/nfs4client.c | 1 -
>> > fs/nfsd/nfs4layouts.c | 1 -
>> > fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c | 1 -
>> > fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c | 1 -
>> > 20 files changed, 36 deletions(-)
>> >
>>
>
On Tue, Dec 25, 2018 at 11:12:20PM +0100, Tom Psyborg wrote:
> there was discussion about this just some days ago. CC 4-5 lists is
> more than enough
>
I don't know who you were discussing this with...
You should CC the 0th patch to all the mailinglists. That much is a
clear rule.
For the rest, Julia's position is the more conservative one. I was in
a conversation in RL and they were like, "CC everyone for all the
patches". It depends on the context, of course. If the patches are
dependent on each other then you *have* to CC everyone for everything.
If we really have other clear rules, then it should be encoded into
get_maintainer.pl so that it's automatic.
My other question is why do the [email protected]
people feel like they need to be CC'd about every driver??? I always
remove them from the CC list unless it's an arch/arm issue.
regards,
dan carpenter
PS: Please, no more top posting.
On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 04:40:55PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 25, 2018 at 11:12:20PM +0100, Tom Psyborg wrote:
> > there was discussion about this just some days ago. CC 4-5 lists is
> > more than enough
> >
>
> I don't know who you were discussing this with...
>
> You should CC the 0th patch to all the mailinglists. That much is a
> clear rule.
>
> For the rest, Julia's position is the more conservative one. I was in
> a conversation in RL and they were like, "CC everyone for all the
> patches". It depends on the context, of course. If the patches are
> dependent on each other then you *have* to CC everyone for everything.
Agreed. Ms. Lawall, sending "Cover letter + all relevant XFS patches"
(as you did) was exactly the right thing for us xfs types. :)
For that matter, we prefer to receive through linux-xfs more patches
than necessary (one can send the entire series if one is unsure) than to
go wanting for more context.
--D
> If we really have other clear rules, then it should be encoded into
> get_maintainer.pl so that it's automatic.
>
> My other question is why do the [email protected]
> people feel like they need to be CC'd about every driver??? I always
> remove them from the CC list unless it's an arch/arm issue.
>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
>
> PS: Please, no more top posting.
>
On Fri, 28 Dec 2018, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 04:40:55PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 25, 2018 at 11:12:20PM +0100, Tom Psyborg wrote:
> > > there was discussion about this just some days ago. CC 4-5 lists is
> > > more than enough
> > >
> >
> > I don't know who you were discussing this with...
> >
> > You should CC the 0th patch to all the mailinglists. That much is a
> > clear rule.
> >
> > For the rest, Julia's position is the more conservative one. I was in
> > a conversation in RL and they were like, "CC everyone for all the
> > patches". It depends on the context, of course. If the patches are
> > dependent on each other then you *have* to CC everyone for everything.
>
> Agreed. Ms. Lawall, sending "Cover letter + all relevant XFS patches"
> (as you did) was exactly the right thing for us xfs types. :)
>
> For that matter, we prefer to receive through linux-xfs more patches
> than necessary (one can send the entire series if one is unsure) than to
> go wanting for more context.
Thanks for the confirmation. I was planning to ignore the 4-5 advice,
because there is no way in this case to make a meaningful 4-5 list
suggestion - it's either all or nothing. But 20 patches at once is
perhaps a lot as well. In this case, I just wanted to get rid of the
whole issue at once.
julia
On Sun, 2018-12-23 at 09:57 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> Drop LIST_HEAD where the variable it declares has never
> been used.
>
> The semantic patch that fixes this problem is as follows:
> (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
>
> // <smpl>
> @@
> identifier x;
> @@
> - LIST_HEAD(x);
> ... when != x
> // </smpl>
>
> Fixes: 0e20162ed1e9 ("NFSv4.1 Use MDS auth flavor for data server
> connection")
> Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <[email protected]>
>
> ---
> Successfully 0-day tested on 151 configurations.
>
> fs/nfs/nfs4client.c | 1 -
> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4client.c b/fs/nfs/nfs4client.c
> index 2548405da1f7..735c1056a91c 100644
> --- a/fs/nfs/nfs4client.c
> +++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4client.c
> @@ -145,7 +145,6 @@ static void
> nfs4_shutdown_ds_clients(struct nfs_client *clp)
> {
> struct nfs4_ds_server *dss;
> - LIST_HEAD(shutdown_list);
>
> while (!list_empty(&clp->cl_ds_clients)) {
> dss = list_entry(clp->cl_ds_clients.next,
>
Thanks Julia! Applied to my linux-next branch for inclusion in the 5.1
merge window.
--
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer, Hammerspace
[email protected]