[PATCH 1/3] io-wq: io_wqe_run_queue() doesn't need to use list_empty_careful()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



We hold the wqe lock at this point (which is also annotated), so there's
no need to use the careful variant of list_empty().

Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx>
---
 fs/io-wq.c | 3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/io-wq.c b/fs/io-wq.c
index ba40a7ee31c3..9b375009a553 100644
--- a/fs/io-wq.c
+++ b/fs/io-wq.c
@@ -338,8 +338,7 @@ static void io_worker_handle_work(struct io_worker *worker)
 static inline bool io_wqe_run_queue(struct io_wqe *wqe)
 	__must_hold(wqe->lock)
 {
-	if (!list_empty_careful(&wqe->work_list) &&
-	    !(wqe->flags & IO_WQE_FLAG_STALLED))
+	if (!list_empty(&wqe->work_list) && !(wqe->flags & IO_WQE_FLAG_STALLED))
 		return true;
 	return false;
 }
-- 
2.24.0




[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [IDE]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux