From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
At the end of ocfs2_inode_lock_tracker tmp_oh is true because an
earlier check on tmp_oh being false returns out of the function.
Since tmp_oh is true, the function will always return 1 so remove
the redundant check and return of 0.
Also update description in comment, return -EINVAL and not -1.
Addresses-Coverity: ("Logically dead code")
Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
V2: Fix typo of function name in description.
Update description in comment as noted by Joseph Qi
---
fs/ocfs2/dlmglue.c | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/dlmglue.c b/fs/ocfs2/dlmglue.c
index ad594fef2ab0..640eee2bb903 100644
--- a/fs/ocfs2/dlmglue.c
+++ b/fs/ocfs2/dlmglue.c
@@ -2626,7 +2626,8 @@ void ocfs2_inode_unlock(struct inode *inode,
*
* return < 0 on error, return == 0 if there's no lock holder on the stack
* before this call, return == 1 if this call would be a recursive locking.
- * return == -1 if this lock attempt will cause an upgrade which is forbidden.
+ * return == -EINVAL if this lock attempt will cause an upgrade which is
+ * forbidden.
*
* When taking lock levels into account,we face some different situations.
*
@@ -2712,7 +2713,7 @@ int ocfs2_inode_lock_tracker(struct inode *inode,
return status;
}
}
- return tmp_oh ? 1 : 0;
+ return 1;
}
void ocfs2_inode_unlock_tracker(struct inode *inode,
--
2.20.1
