| Message ID | 1534214813-25712-1-git-send-email-bo.liu@linux.alibaba.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Btrfs: do not pass write_lock_level when processing leaf | expand |
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 10:46:53AM +0800, Liu Bo wrote: > As we're going to return, it doesn't make sense to get a new > write_lock_level from unlock_up. > > Signed-off-by: Liu Bo <bo.liu@linux.alibaba.com> Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c index 41eb47488e75..f032b48094b4 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c @@ -2950,7 +2950,7 @@ int btrfs_search_slot(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, struct btrfs_root *root, } if (!p->search_for_split) unlock_up(p, level, lowest_unlock, - min_write_lock_level, &write_lock_level); + min_write_lock_level, NULL); goto done; } }
As we're going to return, it doesn't make sense to get a new write_lock_level from unlock_up. Signed-off-by: Liu Bo <bo.liu@linux.alibaba.com> --- fs/btrfs/ctree.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)