On 16.12.2017 04:14, Anand Jain wrote: > /* >>> @@ -637,8 +632,11 @@ static void btrfs_free_stale_device(struct >>> btrfs_device *cur_dev) >>> * either use mapper or non mapper path throughout. >>> */ >>> rcu_read_lock(); >>> - not_found = strcmp(rcu_str_deref(dev->name), >>> - rcu_str_deref(cur_dev->name)); >>> + if (cur_dev) >>> + not_found = strcmp(rcu_str_deref(dev->name), >>> + rcu_str_deref(cur_dev->name)); >>> + else >>> + not_found = 0; >> >> nit: Perhaps put a proper documentation header at the beginning of the >> function detailing this behavior. I.e. >> >> /* >> * btrfs_free_stale_device >> * .... >> > > Right. Will add. I posted this comment before reading your other patches, having done that I'd say it's best to add the documentation once all the cleanups have been done, since you also add another semantics with the "path" argument. > > Thanks, Anand > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
