From 930d88e71d16c81a70f0e3c0b55e9c0c45344118 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Arshad Hussain Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 18:31:52 +0530 Subject: [PATCH 1/1] LU-6142 ptlrpc: Fix style issues for sec_gc.c This patch fixes issues reported by checkpatch for file lustre/ptlrpc/sec_gc.c Change-Id: I19f9f86aba86417b31245da4246c2d6eeb0a3752 Test-Parameters: trivial Signed-off-by: Arshad Hussain Reviewed-on: https://review.whamcloud.com/34551 Tested-by: Jenkins Tested-by: Maloo Reviewed-by: Andreas Dilger Reviewed-by: Sebastien Buisson Reviewed-by: James Simmons --- lustre/ptlrpc/sec_gc.c | 28 +++++++++++++++------------- 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) diff --git a/lustre/ptlrpc/sec_gc.c b/lustre/ptlrpc/sec_gc.c index 5f314db..652a11b 100644 --- a/lustre/ptlrpc/sec_gc.c +++ b/lustre/ptlrpc/sec_gc.c @@ -58,8 +58,8 @@ static atomic_t sec_gc_wait_del = ATOMIC_INIT(0); void sptlrpc_gc_add_sec(struct ptlrpc_sec *sec) { - LASSERT(sec->ps_policy->sp_cops->gc_ctx); - LASSERT(sec->ps_gc_interval > 0); + LASSERT(sec->ps_policy->sp_cops->gc_ctx); + LASSERT(sec->ps_gc_interval > 0); LASSERT(list_empty(&sec->ps_gc_list)); sec->ps_gc_next = ktime_get_real_seconds() + sec->ps_gc_interval; @@ -137,20 +137,20 @@ static void sec_process_ctx_list(void) static void sec_do_gc(struct ptlrpc_sec *sec) { - LASSERT(sec->ps_policy->sp_cops->gc_ctx); + LASSERT(sec->ps_policy->sp_cops->gc_ctx); - if (unlikely(sec->ps_gc_next == 0)) { - CDEBUG(D_SEC, "sec %p(%s) has 0 gc time\n", - sec, sec->ps_policy->sp_name); - return; - } + if (unlikely(sec->ps_gc_next == 0)) { + CDEBUG(D_SEC, "sec %p(%s) has 0 gc time\n", + sec, sec->ps_policy->sp_name); + return; + } - CDEBUG(D_SEC, "check on sec %p(%s)\n", sec, sec->ps_policy->sp_name); + CDEBUG(D_SEC, "check on sec %p(%s)\n", sec, sec->ps_policy->sp_name); if (sec->ps_gc_next > ktime_get_real_seconds()) - return; + return; - sec->ps_policy->sp_cops->gc_ctx(sec); + sec->ps_policy->sp_cops->gc_ctx(sec); sec->ps_gc_next = ktime_get_real_seconds() + sec->ps_gc_interval; } @@ -160,7 +160,8 @@ static void sec_gc_main(struct work_struct *ws) sec_process_ctx_list(); again: - /* go through sec list do gc. + /* + * go through sec list do gc. * FIXME here we iterate through the whole list each time which * is not optimal. we perhaps want to use balanced binary tree * to trace each sec as order of expiry time. @@ -169,7 +170,8 @@ again: */ mutex_lock(&sec_gc_mutex); list_for_each_entry(sec, &sec_gc_list, ps_gc_list) { - /* if someone is waiting to be deleted, let it + /* + * if someone is waiting to be deleted, let it * proceed as soon as possible. */ if (atomic_read(&sec_gc_wait_del)) { -- 1.8.3.1