On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 06:36:08AM -0500, Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote: > On 9:05 19/06, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > > > > > > On 19.06.19 г. 3:35 ч., Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote: > > > Simplification. > > > No point passing the tree variable when it can be evaluated > > > from inode. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgold...@suse.com> > > > > The patch is good, however, there are several calls to find_ > > lock_delalloc_range in btrfs tests so you'd need to fix those > > invocations, otherwise compilation of the in-kernel test suite will fails. > > > > fs/btrfs/tests/extent-io-tests.c: found = > > find_lock_delalloc_range(inode, &tmp, locked_page, &start, > > fs/btrfs/tests/extent-io-tests.c: found = > > find_lock_delalloc_range(inode, &tmp, locked_page, &start, > > fs/btrfs/tests/extent-io-tests.c: found = > > find_lock_delalloc_range(inode, &tmp, locked_page, &start, > > fs/btrfs/tests/extent-io-tests.c: found = > > find_lock_delalloc_range(inode, &tmp, locked_page, &start, > > fs/btrfs/tests/extent-io-tests.c: found = > > find_lock_delalloc_range(inode, &tmp, locked_page, &start, > > > > > > Oh, I missed the test, even if it was listed as EXPORT_FOR_TESTS. > Looking at the tests, it seems it needs to work on a different io_tree than > in the inode.
If it's possible/correct to set the test inode tree pointer, then I guess the change still applies. The testing code works on dummy or otherwise crafted structures, so this kind of tweak does not sound off.
