On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 05:06:21PM -0500, Olga Kornievskaia wrote: > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 4:05 PM, J. Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I don't understand yet why you need these two cases. Anyway, I'd rather > > you did this in the caller. So the caller can do either: > > > > spin_lock() > > list_del() > > spin_unlock() > > cleanup_async_copy() > > > > or just > > > > cleanup_async_copy() > > > > Or define another helper for the first case if you're really doing it a > > lot. Just don't make me have to remember what that second argument > > means each time I see it used. > > Ok I'll fix it. It was added after I changed where copy was added to > the list. In one case, now I needed to do all of the cleanup but the > copy wasn't added to the list yet. As long as you've at least initialized the list, it's OK to call list_del() on it. So another alternative might just be to call list_del() in both cases. --b. -- 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
