On 2/28/19 12:16 AM, David Sterba wrote:
On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 01:39:51AM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:The following patches btrfs: cleanup btrfs_set_acl btrfs: start transaction in btrfs_xattr_handler_set btrfs: create transaction in btrfs_set_prop_notrans made the btrfs_setxattr() argument trans to be never NULL, so delete the code when trans is NULL in btrfs_setxattr(). Also fix the c-code style. Signed-off-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@xxxxxxxxxx> --- v4: born fs/btrfs/xattr.c | 28 +++++----------------------- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/xattr.c b/fs/btrfs/xattr.c index 8e301a1ae304..b3281d4d95b9 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/xattr.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/xattr.c @@ -220,35 +220,17 @@ static int do_setxattr(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, /* * @value: "" makes the attribute to empty, NULL removes it */ -int btrfs_setxattr(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, - struct inode *inode, const char *name, - const void *value, size_t size, int flags) +int btrfs_setxattr(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, struct inode *inode, + const char *name, const void *value, size_t size, int flags) { struct btrfs_root *root = BTRFS_I(inode)->root; - int ret; + + ASSERT(!trans);Isn't this reversed? ASSERT(trans == 0) is not what we want
You are right. As such the intention was to delete this function as a whole, which happened in the next patch. Will fix.
Thanks, Anand
