On 15.05.2018 20:52, Liu Bo wrote:
> In read_block_for_search(), it's straightforward to use
> extent_buffer_uptodate() instead since 0 is passed as parent transid to

"instead of the more heavyweight btrfs_buffer_update"

> btrfs_buffer_uptodate(), which means the check for parent transid is not
> needed.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Liu Bo <bo....@linux.alibaba.com>

Codewise LGTM:

Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov <nbori...@suse.com>
> ---
>  fs/btrfs/ctree.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c
> index 9fa3d77c98d4..a96d308c51b8 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c
> @@ -2445,7 +2445,7 @@ noinline void btrfs_unlock_up_safe(struct btrfs_path 
> *path, int level)
>                * and give up so that our caller doesn't loop forever
>                * on our EAGAINs.
>                */
> -             if (!btrfs_buffer_uptodate(tmp, 0, 0))
> +             if (!extent_buffer_uptodate(tmp))
>                       ret = -EIO;
>               free_extent_buffer(tmp);
>       } else {
> 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to