Re: [PATCH] nfs: use KMEM_CACHE() to create nfs_commit_data cache

[Kunwu Chan]

Thanks for the reply.

On 2024/2/29 21:40, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-02-29 at 17:41 +0800, kunwu.chan@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > From: Kunwu Chan <chentao@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Use the KMEM_CACHE() macro instead of kmem_cache_create() to simplify
> > the creation of SLAB caches when the default values are used.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Kunwu Chan <chentao@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   fs/nfs/write.c | 5 +----
> >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/nfs/write.c b/fs/nfs/write.c
> > index bb79d3a886ae..6a75772d447f 100644
> > --- a/fs/nfs/write.c
> > +++ b/fs/nfs/write.c
> > @@ -2148,10 +2148,7 @@ int __init nfs_init_writepagecache(void)
> >   	if (nfs_wdata_mempool == NULL)
> >   		goto out_destroy_write_cache;
> >   
> > -	nfs_cdata_cachep = kmem_cache_create("nfs_commit_data",
> > -					     sizeof(struct
> > nfs_commit_data),
> > -					     0, SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN,
> > -					     NULL);
> > +	nfs_cdata_cachep = KMEM_CACHE(nfs_commit_data,
> > SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN);
> >   	if (nfs_cdata_cachep == NULL)
> >   		goto out_destroy_write_mempool;
>
> If this were being done as part of an actual functional code change,
> then I'd be OK with it, but otherwise it is just unnecessary churn that
> gets in the way of back porting any future fixes.
It's just my personal opinion, I meant to do some cleanup. It's not 
entirely necessary either, as everyone prefers a different style of 
code. It doesn't matter.
>
--
Thanks,
  Kunwu