* [PATCH 0/3] Small code style cleanup for ctree.c
@ 2019-09-10 7:40 Qu Wenruo
2019-09-10 7:40 ` [PATCH 1/3] btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_slot() Qu Wenruo
` (3 more replies)
0 siblings, 4 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Qu Wenruo @ 2019-09-10 7:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-btrfs
Some small enhance found during the btrfs_verify_level_key() rework.
Qu Wenruo (3):
btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_slot()
btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_old_slot()
btrfs: ctree: Remove stalled comment of setting up path lock
fs/btrfs/ctree.c | 211 +++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
1 file changed, 101 insertions(+), 110 deletions(-)
--
2.23.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* [PATCH 1/3] btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_slot() 2019-09-10 7:40 [PATCH 0/3] Small code style cleanup for ctree.c Qu Wenruo @ 2019-09-10 7:40 ` Qu Wenruo 2019-09-10 7:54 ` Anand Jain 2019-09-10 8:24 ` Nikolay Borisov 2019-09-10 7:40 ` [PATCH 2/3] btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_old_slot() Qu Wenruo ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Qu Wenruo @ 2019-09-10 7:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-btrfs In btrfs_search_slot(), we something like: if (level != 0) { /* Do search inside tree nodes*/ } else { /* Do search inside tree leaves */ goto done; } This caused extra indent for tree node search code. Change it to something like: if (level == 0) { /* Do search inside tree leaves */ goto done' } /* Do search inside tree nodes */ So we have more space to maneuver our code, this is especially useful as the tree nodes search code is more complex than the leaves search code. Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> --- fs/btrfs/ctree.c | 139 +++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------ 1 file changed, 68 insertions(+), 71 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c index 5df76c17775a..1e29183cdf62 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c @@ -2761,6 +2761,7 @@ int btrfs_search_slot(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, struct btrfs_root *root, } while (b) { + int dec = 0; level = btrfs_header_level(b); /* @@ -2837,75 +2838,7 @@ int btrfs_search_slot(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, struct btrfs_root *root, if (ret < 0) goto done; - if (level != 0) { - int dec = 0; - if (ret && slot > 0) { - dec = 1; - slot -= 1; - } - p->slots[level] = slot; - err = setup_nodes_for_search(trans, root, p, b, level, - ins_len, &write_lock_level); - if (err == -EAGAIN) - goto again; - if (err) { - ret = err; - goto done; - } - b = p->nodes[level]; - slot = p->slots[level]; - - /* - * slot 0 is special, if we change the key - * we have to update the parent pointer - * which means we must have a write lock - * on the parent - */ - if (slot == 0 && ins_len && - write_lock_level < level + 1) { - write_lock_level = level + 1; - btrfs_release_path(p); - goto again; - } - - unlock_up(p, level, lowest_unlock, - min_write_lock_level, &write_lock_level); - - if (level == lowest_level) { - if (dec) - p->slots[level]++; - goto done; - } - - err = read_block_for_search(root, p, &b, level, - slot, key); - if (err == -EAGAIN) - goto again; - if (err) { - ret = err; - goto done; - } - - if (!p->skip_locking) { - level = btrfs_header_level(b); - if (level <= write_lock_level) { - err = btrfs_try_tree_write_lock(b); - if (!err) { - btrfs_set_path_blocking(p); - btrfs_tree_lock(b); - } - p->locks[level] = BTRFS_WRITE_LOCK; - } else { - err = btrfs_tree_read_lock_atomic(b); - if (!err) { - btrfs_set_path_blocking(p); - btrfs_tree_read_lock(b); - } - p->locks[level] = BTRFS_READ_LOCK; - } - p->nodes[level] = b; - } - } else { + if (level == 0) { p->slots[level] = slot; if (ins_len > 0 && btrfs_leaf_free_space(b) < ins_len) { @@ -2916,8 +2849,8 @@ int btrfs_search_slot(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, struct btrfs_root *root, } btrfs_set_path_blocking(p); - err = split_leaf(trans, root, key, - p, ins_len, ret == 0); + err = split_leaf(trans, root, key, p, ins_len, + ret == 0); BUG_ON(err > 0); if (err) { @@ -2930,6 +2863,70 @@ int btrfs_search_slot(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, struct btrfs_root *root, min_write_lock_level, NULL); goto done; } + + if (ret && slot > 0) { + dec = 1; + slot -= 1; + } + p->slots[level] = slot; + err = setup_nodes_for_search(trans, root, p, b, level, ins_len, + &write_lock_level); + if (err == -EAGAIN) + goto again; + if (err) { + ret = err; + goto done; + } + b = p->nodes[level]; + slot = p->slots[level]; + + /* + * slot 0 is special, if we change the key we have to update + * the parent pointer which means we must have a write lock + * on the parent + */ + if (slot == 0 && ins_len && write_lock_level < level + 1) { + write_lock_level = level + 1; + btrfs_release_path(p); + goto again; + } + + unlock_up(p, level, lowest_unlock, min_write_lock_level, + &write_lock_level); + + if (level == lowest_level) { + if (dec) + p->slots[level]++; + goto done; + } + + err = read_block_for_search(root, p, &b, level, slot, key); + if (err == -EAGAIN) + goto again; + if (err) { + ret = err; + goto done; + } + + if (!p->skip_locking) { + level = btrfs_header_level(b); + if (level <= write_lock_level) { + err = btrfs_try_tree_write_lock(b); + if (!err) { + btrfs_set_path_blocking(p); + btrfs_tree_lock(b); + } + p->locks[level] = BTRFS_WRITE_LOCK; + } else { + err = btrfs_tree_read_lock_atomic(b); + if (!err) { + btrfs_set_path_blocking(p); + btrfs_tree_read_lock(b); + } + p->locks[level] = BTRFS_READ_LOCK; + } + p->nodes[level] = b; + } } ret = 1; done: -- 2.23.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/3] btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_slot() 2019-09-10 7:40 ` [PATCH 1/3] btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_slot() Qu Wenruo @ 2019-09-10 7:54 ` Anand Jain 2019-09-10 8:24 ` Nikolay Borisov 1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Anand Jain @ 2019-09-10 7:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Qu Wenruo, linux-btrfs This patch also adds line stretching until 80 chars. looks good. Reviewed-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/3] btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_slot() 2019-09-10 7:40 ` [PATCH 1/3] btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_slot() Qu Wenruo 2019-09-10 7:54 ` Anand Jain @ 2019-09-10 8:24 ` Nikolay Borisov 2019-09-10 8:31 ` Qu Wenruo 1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Nikolay Borisov @ 2019-09-10 8:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Qu Wenruo, linux-btrfs On 10.09.19 г. 10:40 ч., Qu Wenruo wrote: > In btrfs_search_slot(), we something like: > > if (level != 0) { > /* Do search inside tree nodes*/ > } else { > /* Do search inside tree leaves */ > goto done; > } > > This caused extra indent for tree node search code. > Change it to something like: > > if (level == 0) { > /* Do search inside tree leaves */ > goto done' > } > /* Do search inside tree nodes */ > > So we have more space to maneuver our code, this is especially useful as > the tree nodes search code is more complex than the leaves search code. > > Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> I actually thing this patch makes comprehending the function worse. Because the else is now somewhat implicit. E.g. one has to pay careful attention to the contents inside the first if and especially the unconditional 'goto done' to be able to understand the code after the 'if' construct. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/3] btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_slot() 2019-09-10 8:24 ` Nikolay Borisov @ 2019-09-10 8:31 ` Qu Wenruo 2019-09-10 8:42 ` Nikolay Borisov 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Qu Wenruo @ 2019-09-10 8:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Nikolay Borisov, Qu Wenruo, linux-btrfs On 2019/9/10 下午4:24, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > > > On 10.09.19 г. 10:40 ч., Qu Wenruo wrote: >> In btrfs_search_slot(), we something like: >> >> if (level != 0) { >> /* Do search inside tree nodes*/ >> } else { >> /* Do search inside tree leaves */ >> goto done; >> } >> >> This caused extra indent for tree node search code. >> Change it to something like: >> >> if (level == 0) { >> /* Do search inside tree leaves */ >> goto done' >> } >> /* Do search inside tree nodes */ >> >> So we have more space to maneuver our code, this is especially useful as >> the tree nodes search code is more complex than the leaves search code. >> >> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> > > I actually thing this patch makes comprehending the function worse. If the level == 0 lines is over 50 lines, maybe. But it's just 22 lines. > Because the else is now somewhat implicit. E.g. one has to pay careful > attention to the contents inside the first if and especially the > unconditional 'goto done' to be able to understand the code after the > 'if' construct. That's the same for the original code, you need to go a level upper to see we're in level > 0 branch. Thanks, Qu > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/3] btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_slot() 2019-09-10 8:31 ` Qu Wenruo @ 2019-09-10 8:42 ` Nikolay Borisov 2019-09-23 16:09 ` David Sterba 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Nikolay Borisov @ 2019-09-10 8:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Qu Wenruo, WenRuo Qu, linux-btrfs On 10.09.19 г. 11:31 ч., Qu Wenruo wrote: > > > On 2019/9/10 下午4:24, Nikolay Borisov wrote: >> >> >> On 10.09.19 г. 10:40 ч., Qu Wenruo wrote: >>> In btrfs_search_slot(), we something like: >>> >>> if (level != 0) { >>> /* Do search inside tree nodes*/ >>> } else { >>> /* Do search inside tree leaves */ >>> goto done; >>> } >>> >>> This caused extra indent for tree node search code. >>> Change it to something like: >>> >>> if (level == 0) { >>> /* Do search inside tree leaves */ >>> goto done' >>> } >>> /* Do search inside tree nodes */ >>> >>> So we have more space to maneuver our code, this is especially useful as >>> the tree nodes search code is more complex than the leaves search code. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> >> >> I actually thing this patch makes comprehending the function worse. > > If the level == 0 lines is over 50 lines, maybe. > > But it's just 22 lines. >> Because the else is now somewhat implicit. E.g. one has to pay careful >> attention to the contents inside the first if and especially the >> unconditional 'goto done' to be able to understand the code after the >> 'if' construct. > > That's the same for the original code, you need to go a level upper to > see we're in level > 0 branch. But that's explicit with the 'if' > > Thanks, > Qu >> > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/3] btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_slot() 2019-09-10 8:42 ` Nikolay Borisov @ 2019-09-23 16:09 ` David Sterba 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: David Sterba @ 2019-09-23 16:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Nikolay Borisov; +Cc: Qu Wenruo, WenRuo Qu, linux-btrfs On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 11:42:47AM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > > > On 10.09.19 г. 11:31 ч., Qu Wenruo wrote: > > > > > > On 2019/9/10 下午4:24, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 10.09.19 г. 10:40 ч., Qu Wenruo wrote: > >>> In btrfs_search_slot(), we something like: > >>> > >>> if (level != 0) { > >>> /* Do search inside tree nodes*/ > >>> } else { > >>> /* Do search inside tree leaves */ > >>> goto done; > >>> } > >>> > >>> This caused extra indent for tree node search code. > >>> Change it to something like: > >>> > >>> if (level == 0) { > >>> /* Do search inside tree leaves */ > >>> goto done' > >>> } > >>> /* Do search inside tree nodes */ > >>> > >>> So we have more space to maneuver our code, this is especially useful as > >>> the tree nodes search code is more complex than the leaves search code. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> > >> > >> I actually thing this patch makes comprehending the function worse. > > > > If the level == 0 lines is over 50 lines, maybe. > > > > But it's just 22 lines. > >> Because the else is now somewhat implicit. E.g. one has to pay careful > >> attention to the contents inside the first if and especially the > >> unconditional 'goto done' to be able to understand the code after the > >> 'if' construct. > > > > That's the same for the original code, you need to go a level upper to > > see we're in level > 0 branch. > > But that's explicit with the 'if' Well, I don't see a strong reason for one or another. I see your point about the explicit 'if/else' for a condition that has two exclusive options. I looked at the code with the patch applied and regarding readability, the if (level == 0) block is short enough to be seen at once and is an 'take a shortcut here'. The indentation level reduction improvement seems justified to me. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/3] btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_old_slot() 2019-09-10 7:40 [PATCH 0/3] Small code style cleanup for ctree.c Qu Wenruo 2019-09-10 7:40 ` [PATCH 1/3] btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_slot() Qu Wenruo @ 2019-09-10 7:40 ` Qu Wenruo 2019-09-10 7:58 ` Anand Jain 2019-09-23 16:32 ` David Sterba 2019-09-10 7:40 ` [PATCH 3/3] btrfs: ctree: Remove stalled comment of setting up path lock Qu Wenruo 2019-09-23 16:36 ` [PATCH 0/3] Small code style cleanup for ctree.c David Sterba 3 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Qu Wenruo @ 2019-09-10 7:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-btrfs Pretty much the same refactor for btrfs_search_slot(). Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> --- fs/btrfs/ctree.c | 68 +++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------- 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c index 1e29183cdf62..3be8b32c0d37 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c @@ -2983,6 +2983,7 @@ int btrfs_search_old_slot(struct btrfs_root *root, const struct btrfs_key *key, p->locks[level] = BTRFS_READ_LOCK; while (b) { + int dec = 0; level = btrfs_header_level(b); p->nodes[level] = b; @@ -3003,48 +3004,45 @@ int btrfs_search_old_slot(struct btrfs_root *root, const struct btrfs_key *key, if (ret < 0) goto done; - if (level != 0) { - int dec = 0; - if (ret && slot > 0) { - dec = 1; - slot -= 1; - } + if (level == 0) { p->slots[level] = slot; unlock_up(p, level, lowest_unlock, 0, NULL); + goto done; + } + if (ret && slot > 0) { + dec = 1; + slot -= 1; + } + p->slots[level] = slot; + unlock_up(p, level, lowest_unlock, 0, NULL); - if (level == lowest_level) { - if (dec) - p->slots[level]++; - goto done; - } + if (level == lowest_level) { + if (dec) + p->slots[level]++; + goto done; + } - err = read_block_for_search(root, p, &b, level, - slot, key); - if (err == -EAGAIN) - goto again; - if (err) { - ret = err; - goto done; - } + err = read_block_for_search(root, p, &b, level, slot, key); + if (err == -EAGAIN) + goto again; + if (err) { + ret = err; + goto done; + } - level = btrfs_header_level(b); - err = btrfs_tree_read_lock_atomic(b); - if (!err) { - btrfs_set_path_blocking(p); - btrfs_tree_read_lock(b); - } - b = tree_mod_log_rewind(fs_info, p, b, time_seq); - if (!b) { - ret = -ENOMEM; - goto done; - } - p->locks[level] = BTRFS_READ_LOCK; - p->nodes[level] = b; - } else { - p->slots[level] = slot; - unlock_up(p, level, lowest_unlock, 0, NULL); + level = btrfs_header_level(b); + err = btrfs_tree_read_lock_atomic(b); + if (!err) { + btrfs_set_path_blocking(p); + btrfs_tree_read_lock(b); + } + b = tree_mod_log_rewind(fs_info, p, b, time_seq); + if (!b) { + ret = -ENOMEM; goto done; } + p->locks[level] = BTRFS_READ_LOCK; + p->nodes[level] = b; } ret = 1; done: -- 2.23.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/3] btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_old_slot() 2019-09-10 7:40 ` [PATCH 2/3] btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_old_slot() Qu Wenruo @ 2019-09-10 7:58 ` Anand Jain 2019-09-23 16:32 ` David Sterba 1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Anand Jain @ 2019-09-10 7:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Qu Wenruo, linux-btrfs Reviewed-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com> Thanks. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/3] btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_old_slot() 2019-09-10 7:40 ` [PATCH 2/3] btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_old_slot() Qu Wenruo 2019-09-10 7:58 ` Anand Jain @ 2019-09-23 16:32 ` David Sterba 1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: David Sterba @ 2019-09-23 16:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Qu Wenruo; +Cc: linux-btrfs On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 03:40:18PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > Pretty much the same refactor for btrfs_search_slot(). Please write something more sensible than that next time, this changelog makes sense for a short period of time when the patches are in the mailing list and the context is obvious, but once the patch is merged the reference to "same thing as in some funrction" does not help. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 3/3] btrfs: ctree: Remove stalled comment of setting up path lock 2019-09-10 7:40 [PATCH 0/3] Small code style cleanup for ctree.c Qu Wenruo 2019-09-10 7:40 ` [PATCH 1/3] btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_slot() Qu Wenruo 2019-09-10 7:40 ` [PATCH 2/3] btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_old_slot() Qu Wenruo @ 2019-09-10 7:40 ` Qu Wenruo 2019-09-10 7:51 ` Nikolay Borisov 2019-09-23 16:36 ` [PATCH 0/3] Small code style cleanup for ctree.c David Sterba 3 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Qu Wenruo @ 2019-09-10 7:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-btrfs The following comment shows up in btrfs_search_slot() with out much sense: /* * setup the path here so we can release it under lock * contention with the cow code */ if (cow) { /* code touching path->lock[] is far away from here */ } It turns out that just some stalled comment which is not cleaned up properly. The original code is introduced in commit 65b51a009e29 ("btrfs_search_slot: reduce lock contention by cowing in two stages"): + + /* + * setup the path here so we can release it under lock + * contention with the cow code + */ + p->nodes[level] = b; + if (!p->skip_locking) + p->locks[level] = 1; + But in current code base, we have different timing modifying path lock, so just remove that stalled comment. Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> --- fs/btrfs/ctree.c | 4 ---- 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c index 3be8b32c0d37..a2e264190eee 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c @@ -2764,10 +2764,6 @@ int btrfs_search_slot(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, struct btrfs_root *root, int dec = 0; level = btrfs_header_level(b); - /* - * setup the path here so we can release it under lock - * contention with the cow code - */ if (cow) { bool last_level = (level == (BTRFS_MAX_LEVEL - 1)); -- 2.23.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] btrfs: ctree: Remove stalled comment of setting up path lock 2019-09-10 7:40 ` [PATCH 3/3] btrfs: ctree: Remove stalled comment of setting up path lock Qu Wenruo @ 2019-09-10 7:51 ` Nikolay Borisov 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Nikolay Borisov @ 2019-09-10 7:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Qu Wenruo, linux-btrfs On 10.09.19 г. 10:40 ч., Qu Wenruo wrote: > The following comment shows up in btrfs_search_slot() with out much > sense: > > /* > * setup the path here so we can release it under lock > * contention with the cow code > */ > if (cow) { > /* code touching path->lock[] is far away from here */ > } > > It turns out that just some stalled comment which is not cleaned up > properly. > > The original code is introduced in commit 65b51a009e29 > ("btrfs_search_slot: reduce lock contention by cowing in two stages"): > + > + /* > + * setup the path here so we can release it under lock > + * contention with the cow code > + */ > + p->nodes[level] = b; > + if (!p->skip_locking) > + p->locks[level] = 1; > + > > But in current code base, we have different timing modifying path lock, > so just remove that stalled comment. > > Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com> Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com> > --- > fs/btrfs/ctree.c | 4 ---- > 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c > index 3be8b32c0d37..a2e264190eee 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c > @@ -2764,10 +2764,6 @@ int btrfs_search_slot(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, struct btrfs_root *root, > int dec = 0; > level = btrfs_header_level(b); > > - /* > - * setup the path here so we can release it under lock > - * contention with the cow code > - */ > if (cow) { > bool last_level = (level == (BTRFS_MAX_LEVEL - 1)); > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/3] Small code style cleanup for ctree.c 2019-09-10 7:40 [PATCH 0/3] Small code style cleanup for ctree.c Qu Wenruo ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2019-09-10 7:40 ` [PATCH 3/3] btrfs: ctree: Remove stalled comment of setting up path lock Qu Wenruo @ 2019-09-23 16:36 ` David Sterba 3 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: David Sterba @ 2019-09-23 16:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Qu Wenruo; +Cc: linux-btrfs On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 03:40:16PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > Some small enhance found during the btrfs_verify_level_key() rework. > > Qu Wenruo (3): > btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_slot() > btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_old_slot() > btrfs: ctree: Remove stalled comment of setting up path lock Added to misc-next with some adjustments, thanks. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-09-23 16:36 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2019-09-10 7:40 [PATCH 0/3] Small code style cleanup for ctree.c Qu Wenruo 2019-09-10 7:40 ` [PATCH 1/3] btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_slot() Qu Wenruo 2019-09-10 7:54 ` Anand Jain 2019-09-10 8:24 ` Nikolay Borisov 2019-09-10 8:31 ` Qu Wenruo 2019-09-10 8:42 ` Nikolay Borisov 2019-09-23 16:09 ` David Sterba 2019-09-10 7:40 ` [PATCH 2/3] btrfs: ctree: Reduce one indent level for btrfs_search_old_slot() Qu Wenruo 2019-09-10 7:58 ` Anand Jain 2019-09-23 16:32 ` David Sterba 2019-09-10 7:40 ` [PATCH 3/3] btrfs: ctree: Remove stalled comment of setting up path lock Qu Wenruo 2019-09-10 7:51 ` Nikolay Borisov 2019-09-23 16:36 ` [PATCH 0/3] Small code style cleanup for ctree.c David Sterba
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).