On 2010-12-09 at 16:53:38 +0100, Lukas Czerner <lczerner@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Dec 2010, Tobias Klauser wrote:
>
> > IS_ERR() already implies unlikely(), so it can be omitted here.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tobias Klauser <tklauser@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > fs/ext3/namei.c | 2 +-
> > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/ext3/namei.c b/fs/ext3/namei.c
> > index bce9dce..268f776 100644
> > --- a/fs/ext3/namei.c
> > +++ b/fs/ext3/namei.c
> > @@ -1047,7 +1047,7 @@ static struct dentry *ext3_lookup(struct inode * dir, struct dentry *dentry, str
> > return ERR_PTR(-EIO);
> > }
> > inode = ext3_iget(dir->i_sb, ino);
> > - if (unlikely(IS_ERR(inode))) {
> > + if (IS_ERR(inode)) {
> > if (PTR_ERR(inode) == -ESTALE) {
> > ext3_error(dir->i_sb, __func__,
> > "deleted inode referenced: %lu",
> >
>
> Good catch, but I guess the same thing may be done for ext2/4.
I did so actually [0], [1]. Unfortunately I didn't submit the three patches as a
series.
[0] http://lists.openwall.net/linux-ext4/2010/12/09/6
[1] http://lists.openwall.net/linux-ext4/2010/12/09/5
Cheers
Tobias
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
