On 03/31/2012 07:29 PM, majianpeng wrote:
> From 798f3fce3d077db049a44d0d2434261c937796e9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: majianpeng <majianpeng@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2012 10:23:56 +0800
> Subject: [PATCH] md/raid1:using else-if instead if.
>
> Signed-off-by: majianpeng <majianpeng@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/md/raid1.c | 3 +--
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/md/raid1.c b/drivers/md/raid1.c
> index 4a40a20..a9de970 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/raid1.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/raid1.c
> @@ -2024,8 +2024,7 @@ static void handle_sync_write_finished(struct r1conf *conf, struct r1bio *r1_bio
> if (test_bit(BIO_UPTODATE, &bio->bi_flags) &&
> test_bit(R1BIO_MadeGood, &r1_bio->state)) {
> rdev_clear_badblocks(rdev, r1_bio->sector, s);
> - }
> - if (!test_bit(BIO_UPTODATE, &bio->bi_flags) &&
> + } else if (!test_bit(BIO_UPTODATE, &bio->bi_flags) &&
> test_bit(R1BIO_WriteError, &r1_bio->state)) {
> if (!rdev_set_badblocks(rdev, r1_bio->sector, s, 0))
> md_error(conf->mddev, rdev);
It would be even better to:
if (test_bit(BIO_UPDATE, &bio->bi_flags)) {
if (test_bit(R1BIO_MadeGood, &r1_bio->state))
rdev_clear_badblocks(rdev, r1_bio->sector, s);
} else {
if (test_bit(R1BIO_WriteError, &r1_bio->state)) {
...
... rather than testing the bit twice.
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
