On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 09:50:34AM -0400, Anna Schumaker wrote:
> > + } else {
> > + if (NFS_SERVER(ino)->pnfs_curr_ld->return_range) {
> > + NFS_SERVER(ino)->pnfs_curr_ld->return_range(lo,
> > + &args->cbl_range);
> > + }
> > }
> Is there a reason you're nesting the else-if here?
To catch the intent - the first two clauses find excuses why we can't return
quite yet, while this if is for an optional feature in the actual return
path. If I wasn't updating but newly writing the function I'd actually
do something like:
...
rv = NFS4ERR_DELAY;
if (test_bit(NFS_LAYOUT_BULK_RECALL, &lo->plh_flags))
goto out_set_stateid;
if (pnfs_mark_matching_lsegs_invalid(lo, &free_me_list,
&args->cbl_range)) {
need_commit = true;
goto out_set_stateid;
}
rv = NFS4ERR_NOMATCHING_LAYOUT;
if (NFS_SERVER(ino)->pnfs_curr_ld->return_range) {
NFS_SERVER(ino)->pnfs_curr_ld->return_range(lo,
&args->cbl_range);
}
out_set_stateid:
...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
