On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 12:34 PM wrote: > > From: ye xingchen <ye.xingchen@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Return the value nilfs_segctor_sync() directly instead of storing it in > another redundant variable. > > Reported-by: Zeal Robot <zealci@xxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: ye xingchen <ye.xingchen@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > fs/nilfs2/segment.c | 4 +--- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/nilfs2/segment.c b/fs/nilfs2/segment.c > index 0afe0832c754..9abae2c9120e 100644 > --- a/fs/nilfs2/segment.c > +++ b/fs/nilfs2/segment.c > @@ -2235,7 +2235,6 @@ int nilfs_construct_segment(struct super_block *sb) > struct the_nilfs *nilfs = sb->s_fs_info; > struct nilfs_sc_info *sci = nilfs->ns_writer; > struct nilfs_transaction_info *ti; > - int err; > > if (!sci) > return -EROFS; > @@ -2243,8 +2242,7 @@ int nilfs_construct_segment(struct super_block *sb) > /* A call inside transactions causes a deadlock. */ > BUG_ON((ti = current->journal_info) && ti->ti_magic == NILFS_TI_MAGIC); > > - err = nilfs_segctor_sync(sci); > - return err; > + return nilfs_segctor_sync(sci); > } > > /** > -- > 2.25.1 The patch is not wrong though this kind of minor rewrite seems endless. Anyway, I would like to queue this unless there is an objection. Thanks, Ryusuke Konishi
