2021-11-04 06:37:12

by xu xin

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH v2] ext4: Remove unnecessary assignments

From: luo penghao <[email protected]>

The assignment at the end of the function is not necessary

The clang_analyzer complains as follows:

fs/ext4/mballoc.c:3889:3 warning:

Value stored to 'err' is never read

change in v2:

Repair the sending email box

Reported-by: Zeal Robot <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: luo penghao <[email protected]>
---
fs/ext4/mballoc.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
index 089c958..f1258a7 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
@@ -3886,7 +3886,7 @@ void ext4_mb_mark_bb(struct super_block *sb, ext4_fsblk_t block,
if (err)
goto out_err;
sync_dirty_buffer(bitmap_bh);
- err = ext4_handle_dirty_metadata(NULL, NULL, gdp_bh);
+ ext4_handle_dirty_metadata(NULL, NULL, gdp_bh);
sync_dirty_buffer(gdp_bh);

out_err:
--
2.15.2



2022-01-05 23:24:47

by Theodore Ts'o

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ext4: Remove unnecessary assignments

On Thu, Nov 04, 2021 at 06:36:37AM +0000, [email protected] wrote:
> From: luo penghao <[email protected]>
>
> The assignment at the end of the function is not necessary
>
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> index 089c958..f1258a7 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> @@ -3886,7 +3886,7 @@ void ext4_mb_mark_bb(struct super_block *sb, ext4_fsblk_t block,
> if (err)
> goto out_err;
> sync_dirty_buffer(bitmap_bh);
> - err = ext4_handle_dirty_metadata(NULL, NULL, gdp_bh);
> + ext4_handle_dirty_metadata(NULL, NULL, gdp_bh);
> sync_dirty_buffer(gdp_bh);
>
> out_err:

There's actually a bigger issue here than the Clang analyzer
complaining about the unnecessasary assignment --- and that is we
*should* be propagating the error up to ext4_mb_mark_bb's callers, and
those callers should be logging errors and potentially aborting the
fast_commit replay.

There might be some errors that can be ignored, if an idempotent
operation doesn't need to be redone. However, in cases like
ext4_handle_dirty_metadata(), or ext4_read_block_bitmap(), any
failures are probably due to something fatal happening --- either an
ENOMEM, or an I/O error, etc., and simply silently aborting the
current function without logging any kind of problem is going to make
it much harder to root cause a potential fast commit replay failure.

So what we should probably do is make ext4_mb_mark_bb return an error,
and then we'll need to look at all of the callers of ext4_mb_mark_bb,
and fix them up as necessary.

- Ted