| Message ID | 20240823070049.3499625-4-lilingfeng3@huawei.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | nfsd: fix some comments and code cleanup | expand |
On Fri, 2024-08-23 at 15:00 +0800, Li Lingfeng wrote: > Just remove the redundant blank line in do_open_permission. No function > change. > > Signed-off-by: Li Lingfeng <lilingfeng3@huawei.com> > --- > fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c > index 2e39cf2e502a..0068db924060 100644 > --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c > +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c > @@ -141,7 +141,6 @@ fh_dup2(struct svc_fh *dst, struct svc_fh *src) > static __be32 > do_open_permission(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct svc_fh *current_fh, struct nfsd4_open *open, int accmode) > { > - > if (open->op_truncate && > !(open->op_share_access & NFS4_SHARE_ACCESS_WRITE)) > return nfserr_inval; NACK. In general, we don't take whitespace patches. They just make backporting harder later if you have to do it. If you have a material change to make in this area, then go ahead and fix the whitespace, but otherwise don't bother.
Thank you for your response. I appreciate you taking the time to address my concerns. Moving forward, I will be more mindful and refrain from submitting patches like this. 在 2024/8/23 20:08, Jeff Layton 写道: > On Fri, 2024-08-23 at 15:00 +0800, Li Lingfeng wrote: >> Just remove the redundant blank line in do_open_permission. No function >> change. >> >> Signed-off-by: Li Lingfeng <lilingfeng3@huawei.com> >> --- >> fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c | 1 - >> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c >> index 2e39cf2e502a..0068db924060 100644 >> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c >> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c >> @@ -141,7 +141,6 @@ fh_dup2(struct svc_fh *dst, struct svc_fh *src) >> static __be32 >> do_open_permission(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct svc_fh *current_fh, struct nfsd4_open *open, int accmode) >> { >> - >> if (open->op_truncate && >> !(open->op_share_access & NFS4_SHARE_ACCESS_WRITE)) >> return nfserr_inval; > NACK. In general, we don't take whitespace patches. They just make > backporting harder later if you have to do it. If you have a material > change to make in this area, then go ahead and fix the whitespace, but > otherwise don't bother.
diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c index 2e39cf2e502a..0068db924060 100644 --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c @@ -141,7 +141,6 @@ fh_dup2(struct svc_fh *dst, struct svc_fh *src) static __be32 do_open_permission(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct svc_fh *current_fh, struct nfsd4_open *open, int accmode) { - if (open->op_truncate && !(open->op_share_access & NFS4_SHARE_ACCESS_WRITE)) return nfserr_inval;
Just remove the redundant blank line in do_open_permission. No function change. Signed-off-by: Li Lingfeng <lilingfeng3@huawei.com> --- fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)