io_uring: fix warnings on shadow variables

JIRA: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-64867

commit 1da2f311ba53a1ee106a637cf17aba05d2acc1ff
Author: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Date:   Fri Mar 29 17:19:45 2024 -0600

    io_uring: fix warnings on shadow variables
    
    There are a few of those:
    
    io_uring/fdinfo.c:170:16: warning: declaration shadows a local variable [-Wshadow]
      170 |                 struct file *f = io_file_from_index(&ctx->file_table, i);
          |                              ^
    io_uring/fdinfo.c:53:67: note: previous declaration is here
       53 | __cold void io_uring_show_fdinfo(struct seq_file *m, struct file *f)
          |                                                                   ^
    io_uring/cancel.c:187:25: warning: declaration shadows a local variable [-Wshadow]
      187 |                 struct io_uring_task *tctx = node->task->io_uring;
          |                                       ^
    io_uring/cancel.c:166:31: note: previous declaration is here
      166 |                              struct io_uring_task *tctx,
          |                                                    ^
    io_uring/register.c:371:25: warning: declaration shadows a local variable [-Wshadow]
      371 |                 struct io_uring_task *tctx = node->task->io_uring;
          |                                       ^
    io_uring/register.c:312:24: note: previous declaration is here
      312 |         struct io_uring_task *tctx = NULL;
          |                               ^
    
    and a simple cleanup gets rid of them. For the fdinfo case, make a
    distinction between the file being passed in (for the ring), and the
    registered files we iterate. For the other two cases, just get rid of
    shadowed variable, there's no reason to have a new one.
    
    Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>

Signed-off-by: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
This commit is contained in:
Jeff Moyer 2024-03-29 17:19:45 -06:00
parent d45024afd9
commit 0c4716a69b
3 changed files with 4 additions and 7 deletions

View File

@ -184,9 +184,7 @@ static int __io_async_cancel(struct io_cancel_data *cd,
io_ring_submit_lock(ctx, issue_flags);
ret = -ENOENT;
list_for_each_entry(node, &ctx->tctx_list, ctx_node) {
struct io_uring_task *tctx = node->task->io_uring;
ret = io_async_cancel_one(tctx, cd);
ret = io_async_cancel_one(node->task->io_uring, cd);
if (ret != -ENOENT) {
if (!all)
break;

View File

@ -52,9 +52,9 @@ static __cold int io_uring_show_cred(struct seq_file *m, unsigned int id,
* Caller holds a reference to the file already, we don't need to do
* anything else to get an extra reference.
*/
__cold void io_uring_show_fdinfo(struct seq_file *m, struct file *f)
__cold void io_uring_show_fdinfo(struct seq_file *m, struct file *file)
{
struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = f->private_data;
struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = file->private_data;
struct io_overflow_cqe *ocqe;
struct io_rings *r = ctx->rings;
struct rusage sq_usage;

View File

@ -368,8 +368,7 @@ static __cold int io_register_iowq_max_workers(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
/* now propagate the restriction to all registered users */
list_for_each_entry(node, &ctx->tctx_list, ctx_node) {
struct io_uring_task *tctx = node->task->io_uring;
tctx = node->task->io_uring;
if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!tctx->io_wq))
continue;