From: Filipe Manana <fdman...@suse.com>
The comment for can_nocow_extent() says that the function will flush
ordered extents, however that never happens and was never true before the
comment was added in commit e4ecaf90bc13 ("btrfs: add comments for
btrfs_check_can_nocow() and can_nocow_extent()"). This is true only for
the function btrfs_check_can_nocow(), which after that commit was renamed
to check_can_nocow(). So just remove that part of the comment.
Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdman...@suse.com>
---
fs/btrfs/inode.c | 3 ---
1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
index 0dbe1aaa0b71..589030cefd90 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
@@ -7105,9 +7105,6 @@ static struct extent_map *btrfs_new_extent_direct(struct
btrfs_inode *inode,
* @strict: if true, omit optimizations that might force us into unnecessary
* cow. e.g., don't trust generation number.
*
- * This function will flush ordered extents in the range to ensure proper
- * nocow checks for (nowait == false) case.
- *
* Return:
* >0 and update @len if we can do nocow write
* 0 if we can't do nocow write
--
2.28.0
