[PATCH] btrfs: Fix the return value in case of error in 'btrfs_mark_extent_written()'

ON()'s in btrfs_mark_extent_written") Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET --- This patch proposal is purely speculative. I'm not sure at all that returning 'ret' is correct (but it looks like it is :) ) What puzzles me is when 'ret' is set, &

[PATCH] btrfs: tests: Fix a memory leak in error handling path in 'run_test()'

If 'btrfs_alloc_path()' fails, we must free the resourses already allocated, as done in the other error handling paths in this function. Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET --- fs/btrfs/tests/free-space-tree-tests.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git

[PATCH V2] btrfs: Remove some dead code

'btrfs_iget()' can not return NULL, so this test can be removed. Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET --- V1 --> v2: fix the patch description --- fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c | 2 -- 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c b/fs/btrfs/free-space-

Re: [PATCH] btrfs: Remove some dead code

Le 03/11/2016 à 13:43, Tobias Klauser a écrit : On 2016-11-01 at 11:26:06 +0100, Christophe JAILLET wrote: 'btrfs_iget()' can not return an error pointer, so this test can be removed. This descrption does not match what the patch actually does. Shouldn't it say "...can

[PATCH] btrfs: Remove some dead code

'btrfs_iget()' can not return an error pointer, so this test can be removed. Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET --- fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c | 2 -- 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c b/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c index e4b48f377d3a..afd8b0c10