On 25 February 2015 at 14:36, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This doesn't change how the code works, but clearly the curly braces
> were intended.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> diff --git a/fs/hfsplus/catalog.c b/fs/hfsplus/catalog.c
> index 7892e6f..022974a 100644
> --- a/fs/hfsplus/catalog.c
> +++ b/fs/hfsplus/catalog.c
> @@ -350,10 +350,11 @@ int hfsplus_delete_cat(u32 cnid, struct inode *dir, struct qstr *str)
> &fd.search_key->cat.name.unicode,
> off + 2, len);
> fd.search_key->key_len = cpu_to_be16(6 + len);
> - } else
> + } else {
> err = hfsplus_cat_build_key(sb, fd.search_key, dir->i_ino, str);
> if (unlikely(err))
> goto out;
> + }
>
> err = hfs_brec_find(&fd, hfs_find_rec_by_key);
> if (err)
Right you are.
I would also add 2 things:
1. CC the author of the last patch (the one which introduced it).
2. Unify the way the return code from hfsplus_cat_build_key() is
checked. Now it has two flavours: "if (unlikely(err < 0))" and "if
(unlikely(err))". The latter is better.
If you do so and resubmit, then it is Reviewed-by: Sergei Antonov
<saproj@xxxxxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
