All comments accepted in v2 in ml, except for the one below.
clear_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags);
if (bargs) {
@@ -3947,10 +4096,8 @@ static int balance_kthread(void *data)
int ret = 0;
mutex_lock(&fs_info->balance_mutex);
- if (fs_info->balance_ctl) {
- btrfs_info(fs_info, "balance: resuming");
+ if (fs_info->balance_ctl)
ret = btrfs_balance(fs_info->balance_ctl, NULL);
- }
Unrelated change.
Why?
I believe this change is related to this patch, as this patch has
added the resume log at btrfs_balance() and so we don't needed
the resume log again in btrfs_kthread().
OR.
I don't know your reasoning. I am ignoring this comment as of now.
V2 is in the ML.
Thanks, Anand
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
