There is a checking of inode with NULL after ubifs_inode(inode), that's not readable, why we need to check a pointer with NULL after we having used it? Although inode=NULL will not hurt ubifs_inode(), checking inode following new_inode() directly before using it seems more reasonable. Signed-off-by: Dongsheng Yang <yangds.fnst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- fs/ubifs/dir.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/fs/ubifs/dir.c b/fs/ubifs/dir.c index a822148..4db0ceb 100644 --- a/fs/ubifs/dir.c +++ b/fs/ubifs/dir.c @@ -92,10 +92,10 @@ struct inode *ubifs_new_inode(struct ubifs_info *c, const struct inode *dir, struct ubifs_inode *ui; inode = new_inode(c->vfs_sb); - ui = ubifs_inode(inode); if (!inode) return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); + ui = ubifs_inode(inode); /* * Set 'S_NOCMTIME' to prevent VFS form updating [mc]time of inodes and * marking them dirty in file write path (see 'file_update_time()'). -- 1.8.4.2 -- 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
