On 18.05.2018 05:55, Liu Bo wrote:
> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 3:03 PM, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 15.05.2018 20:52, Liu Bo wrote:
>>> The check is superfluous since all of callers who set search_for_commit
>>> also have skip_locking set.
>>
>> This is false. For
On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 3:03 PM, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>
>
> On 15.05.2018 20:52, Liu Bo wrote:
>> The check is superfluous since all of callers who set search_for_commit
>> also have skip_locking set.
>
> This is false. For example btrfs_qgroup_rescan_worker sets
>
On 2018年05月16日 15:03, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>
>
> On 15.05.2018 20:52, Liu Bo wrote:
>> The check is superfluous since all of callers who set search_for_commit
>> also have skip_locking set.
>
> This is false. For example btrfs_qgroup_rescan_worker sets
> search_commit_root = 1 but doesn't
On 15.05.2018 20:52, Liu Bo wrote:
> The check is superfluous since all of callers who set search_for_commit
> also have skip_locking set.
This is false. For example btrfs_qgroup_rescan_worker sets
search_commit_root = 1 but doesn't set skip locking. So either your
assumption is wrong or the
The check is superfluous since all of callers who set search_for_commit
also have skip_locking set.
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.c | 2 --
1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c
index 399839df7a8f..cf34eca41d4e