From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out30-124.freemail.mail.aliyun.com (out30-124.freemail.mail.aliyun.com [115.124.30.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 641711F94A for ; Mon, 11 Nov 2024 01:38:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=115.124.30.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1731289114; cv=none; b=QkcD32AMSqEO1g8z/jCvHf+ON01soowr9dVKpVfbK0FkJwkK+7M2BvFQ3+cmfd/2//jKinzE6NdncQAIX0hM3HcwHRCm8fAlST+kpt148FgJj50BDAI82wo0uyzPDk5edbTvvvaj6FzXqrg1ngv/9iApSvXx7wxJuIxYsqVRn1E= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1731289114; c=relaxed/simple; bh=YlAhbnm1I5k+kU1PvnjADRjTwfieELE3uO4yvcd449A=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:References:From:Cc: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=j+8s7qgdqTAZQqiJPgWwOIc4M6rVq1MoPOVaJCWC2mNMVwTgbPsQIOBgS7eDZdvikTfdXERte9tzZxFN0/F0C6sLU3ZM2RfeRPjgOUl88NVJce7APlfoI/4CZnuUK+NcI4NQFt1Fd0dGqCIuQAJZdjaUW1qBcurJU3Ysc2WjBSk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.alibaba.com header.i=@linux.alibaba.com header.b=JPRpQQ0H; arc=none smtp.client-ip=115.124.30.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.alibaba.com header.i=@linux.alibaba.com header.b="JPRpQQ0H" DKIM-Signature:v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.alibaba.com; s=default; t=1731289108; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:From:Content-Type; bh=OOO5xPN3ZUpfGW6Ti+5DdkzIsYWm8WcDbrIu5y57poI=; b=JPRpQQ0H9+HJhk8RKeVeaHEUzOncu2dx2vCYJHOkexHNGgtm9pyLWJbH/kxZ1tez4r5OnhXykLSEPVTQdqTLFSXHMsdS7TOiV4z1rMOSOq8yOq4yBtDU3zqws9OfXYmedzXcyNbg1JS9/AXJSRuHXtURuMiZWEtRE7388Yk/xlw= Received: from 30.221.129.158(mailfrom:joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0WJ3xLg5_1731289107 cluster:ay36) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com; Mon, 11 Nov 2024 09:38:28 +0800 Message-ID: <614f6304-f096-41f7-b0a4-05127904e601@linux.alibaba.com> Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2024 09:38:27 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] ocfs2: update seq_file index in ocfs2_dlm_seq_next To: Wengang Wang , ocfs2-devel@lists.linux.dev References: <20241108192829.58813-1-wen.gang.wang@oracle.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Joseph Qi Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" In-Reply-To: <20241108192829.58813-1-wen.gang.wang@oracle.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 11/9/24 3:28 AM, Wengang Wang wrote: > The following INFO level message was seen: > > seq_file: buggy .next function ocfs2_dlm_seq_next [ocfs2] did not > update position index > > Fix: > Updata m->index to make seq_read_iter happy though the index its self makes > no sense to ocfs2_dlm_seq_next. > > Signed-off-by: Wengang Wang > --- > fs/ocfs2/dlmglue.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/dlmglue.c b/fs/ocfs2/dlmglue.c > index 60df52e4c1f8..349d131369cf 100644 > --- a/fs/ocfs2/dlmglue.c > +++ b/fs/ocfs2/dlmglue.c > @@ -3120,6 +3120,7 @@ static void *ocfs2_dlm_seq_next(struct seq_file *m, void *v, loff_t *pos) > } > spin_unlock(&ocfs2_dlm_tracking_lock); > > + m->index++; We can directly use '(*pos)++' instead. Thanks, Joseph > return iter; > } >