On 2017/7/1 上午4:43, bcache@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> continue_at() doesn't have a return statement anymore.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Coly Li <colyli@xxxxxxx>
Thanks.
Coly
> ---
> drivers/md/bcache/closure.h | 4 ----
> 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/md/bcache/closure.h b/drivers/md/bcache/closure.h
> index 1ec84ca..295b7e4 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/bcache/closure.h
> +++ b/drivers/md/bcache/closure.h
> @@ -312,8 +312,6 @@ static inline void closure_wake_up(struct closure_waitlist *list)
> * been dropped with closure_put()), it will resume execution at @fn running out
> * of @wq (or, if @wq is NULL, @fn will be called by closure_put() directly).
> *
> - * NOTE: This macro expands to a return in the calling function!
> - *
> * This is because after calling continue_at() you no longer have a ref on @cl,
> * and whatever @cl owns may be freed out from under you - a running closure fn
> * has a ref on its own closure which continue_at() drops.
> @@ -340,8 +338,6 @@ do { \
> * Causes @fn to be executed out of @cl, in @wq context (or called directly if
> * @wq is NULL).
> *
> - * NOTE: like continue_at(), this macro expands to a return in the caller!
> - *
> * The ref the caller of continue_at_nobarrier() had on @cl is now owned by @fn,
> * thus it's not safe to touch anything protected by @cl after a
> * continue_at_nobarrier().
>
