On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 12:09:29PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: > On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 10:15:32AM -0700, Mark Fasheh wrote: > > From: Mark Fasheh <mfas...@suse.de> > > > > build_backref_tree() is walking extent refs in what is an otherwise self > > contained chunk of code. We can shrink the total number of lines in > > build_backref_tree() *and* make it more readable by moving that walk into > > its own subroutine. > > > > Signed-off-by: Mark Fasheh <mfas...@suse.de> > > --- > > fs/btrfs/backref-cache.c | 110 +++++++++++++++++++++++---------------- > > 1 file changed, 65 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/backref-cache.c b/fs/btrfs/backref-cache.c > > index d0f6530f23b8..ff0d49ca6e26 100644 > > --- a/fs/btrfs/backref-cache.c > > +++ b/fs/btrfs/backref-cache.c > > @@ -336,6 +336,61 @@ int find_inline_backref(struct extent_buffer *leaf, > > int slot, > > return 0; > > } > > > > +#define SEARCH_COMPLETE 1 > > +#define SEARCH_NEXT 2 > > +static int find_next_ref(struct btrfs_root *extent_root, u64 cur_bytenr, > > + struct btrfs_path *path, unsigned long *ptr, > > + unsigned long *end, struct btrfs_key *key, bool exist) > > I'd rather we do an enum here, so it's clear what we're expecting in the code > context. Thanks,
The function also returns errors (< 0), so do you mean enum for the SEARCH_* values only for for the function as well?
