From: akpm@linux-foundation.org Subject: - jbd-tidy-up-revoke-cache-initialisation-and-destruction.patch removed from -mm tree Date: Fri, 09 May 2008 17:34:09 -0700 Message-ID: <200805100045.m4A0j45l001106@imap1.linux-foundation.org> Reply-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: duaneg@dghda.com, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, mm-commits@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Sender: mm-commits-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org The patch titled jbd: tidy up revoke cache initialisation and destruction has been removed from the -mm tree. Its filename was jbd-tidy-up-revoke-cache-initialisation-and-destruction.patch This patch was dropped because it had testing failures The current -mm tree may be found at http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/mmotm/ ------------------------------------------------------ Subject: jbd: tidy up revoke cache initialisation and destruction From: "Duane Griffin" Make revoke cache destruction safe to call if initialisation fails partially or entirely. This allows it to be used to cleanup in the case of initialisation failure, simplifying that code slightly. Signed-off-by: Duane Griffin Cc: Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton --- fs/jbd/revoke.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++-------------- 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) diff -puN fs/jbd/revoke.c~jbd-tidy-up-revoke-cache-initialisation-and-destruction fs/jbd/revoke.c --- a/fs/jbd/revoke.c~jbd-tidy-up-revoke-cache-initialisation-and-destruction +++ a/fs/jbd/revoke.c @@ -166,33 +166,41 @@ static struct jbd_revoke_record_s *find_ return NULL; } +void journal_destroy_revoke_caches(void) +{ + if (revoke_record_cache) { + kmem_cache_destroy(revoke_record_cache); + revoke_record_cache = NULL; + } + if (revoke_table_cache) { + kmem_cache_destroy(revoke_table_cache); + revoke_table_cache = NULL; + } +} + int __init journal_init_revoke_caches(void) { + J_ASSERT(!revoke_record_cache); + J_ASSERT(!revoke_table_cache); + revoke_record_cache = kmem_cache_create("revoke_record", sizeof(struct jbd_revoke_record_s), 0, SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN|SLAB_TEMPORARY, NULL); if (!revoke_record_cache) - return -ENOMEM; + goto record_cache_failure; revoke_table_cache = kmem_cache_create("revoke_table", sizeof(struct jbd_revoke_table_s), 0, SLAB_TEMPORARY, NULL); - if (!revoke_table_cache) { - kmem_cache_destroy(revoke_record_cache); - revoke_record_cache = NULL; - return -ENOMEM; - } - return 0; -} + if (!revoke_table_cache) + goto table_cache_failure; -void journal_destroy_revoke_caches(void) -{ - kmem_cache_destroy(revoke_record_cache); - revoke_record_cache = NULL; - kmem_cache_destroy(revoke_table_cache); - revoke_table_cache = NULL; +table_cache_failure: + journal_destroy_revoke_caches(); +record_cache_failure: + return -ENOMEM; } static struct jbd_revoke_table_s *journal_init_revoke_table(int hash_size) _ Patches currently in -mm which might be from duaneg@dghda.com are jbd-tidy-up-revoke-cache-initialisation-and-destruction.patch jbd-replace-potentially-false-assertion-with-if-block.patch