Ocfs2 devel - Oct 2008 - [PATCH] quota: Remove bogus 'optimization' in check_idq() and check_bdq()

Checks like <= 0 for an unsigned type do not make much sence. The value
could be only 0 and that does not happen often enough for the check
to be worth it.

Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack at suse.cz>
---
 fs/dquot.c |    4 ++--
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/dquot.c b/fs/dquot.c
index 758bf4a..e95ad55 100644
--- a/fs/dquot.c
+++ b/fs/dquot.c
@@ -1041,7 +1041,7 @@ static inline char ignore_hardlimit(struct dquot *dquot)
 static int check_idq(struct dquot *dquot, qsize_t inodes, char *warntype)
 {
 	*warntype = QUOTA_NL_NOWARN;
-	if (inodes <= 0 || test_bit(DQ_FAKE_B, &dquot->dq_flags))
+	if (test_bit(DQ_FAKE_B, &dquot->dq_flags))
 		return QUOTA_OK;
 
 	if (dquot->dq_dqb.dqb_ihardlimit &&
@@ -1073,7 +1073,7 @@ static int check_idq(struct dquot *dquot, qsize_t inodes,
char *warntype)
 static int check_bdq(struct dquot *dquot, qsize_t space, int prealloc, char
*warntype)
 {
 	*warntype = QUOTA_NL_NOWARN;
-	if (space <= 0 || test_bit(DQ_FAKE_B, &dquot->dq_flags))
+	if (test_bit(DQ_FAKE_B, &dquot->dq_flags))
 		return QUOTA_OK;
 
 	if (dquot->dq_dqb.dqb_bhardlimit &&
-- 
1.5.2.4

On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 07:23:36PM +0200, Jan Kara
wrote:
> Checks like <= 0 for an unsigned type do not make much sence. The value
> could be only 0 and that does not happen often enough for the check
> to be worth it.
	Why not worth it?  Certainly the '<' isn't valid, but is it even
possible to call these functions with 0?  I don't know enough to answer
that, but I'm wondering if it should BUG_ON(inodes == 0).  If not, what
happens after this change?  Obviously inodes==0 means the quota doesn't
change, but could they get a soft warning they wouldn't get before?

Joel

-- 

Life's Little Instruction Book #222

	"Think twice before burdening a friend with a secret."

Joel Becker
Principal Software Developer
Oracle
E-mail: joel.becker at oracle.com
Phone: (650) 506-8127