On 3.02.20 г. 22:49 ч., Josef Bacik wrote: > We have btrfs_wait_ordered_roots() which takes a u64 for nr, but > btrfs_start_delalloc_roots() that takes an int for nr, which makes using > them in conjunction, especially for something like (u64)-1, annoying and > inconsistent. Fix btrfs_start_delalloc_roots() to take a u64 for nr and > adjust start_delalloc_inodes() and it's callers appropriately. > > This means we've adjusted start_delalloc_inodes() to take a pointer of > nr since we want to preserve the ability for start-delalloc_inodes() to > return an error, so simply make it do the nr adjusting as necessary. > > Part of adjusting the callers to this means changing > btrfs_writeback_inodes_sb_nr() to take a u64 for items. This may be > confusing because it seems unrelated, but the caller of > btrfs_writeback_inodes_sb_nr() already passes in a u64, it's just the > function variable that needs to be changed. > > Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@xxxxxxxx>
