On 8/12/21 12:14 PM, Hao Xu wrote:
> We can merge two spin_unlock() operations to one since we removed some
> code not long ago.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hao Xu <haoxu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/io_uring.c | 11 ++++-------
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
> index b29774aa1f09..9cbc66b52643 100644
> --- a/fs/io_uring.c
> +++ b/fs/io_uring.c
> @@ -5231,13 +5231,10 @@ static int io_arm_poll_handler(struct io_kiocb *req)
>
> ret = __io_arm_poll_handler(req, &apoll->poll, &ipt, mask,
> io_async_wake);
> - if (ret || ipt.error) {
> - spin_unlock(&ctx->completion_lock);
> - if (ret)
> - return IO_APOLL_READY;
> - return IO_APOLL_ABORTED;
> - }
> - spin_unlock(&ctx->completion_lock);
> + spin_unlock_irq(&ctx->completion_lock);
This looks weird.
You replace spin_unlock() with spin_unlock_irq() without any spin_lock()
changes.
Thanks,
Joseph
> + if (ret || ipt.error)
> + return ret ? IO_APOLL_READY : IO_APOLL_ABORTED;
> +
> trace_io_uring_poll_arm(ctx, req, req->opcode, req->user_data,
> mask, apoll->poll.events);
> return IO_APOLL_OK;
>
