On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 01:58:22PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > On 2/6/20 2:09 AM, David Sterba wrote: > > Now that we're sure the tree from argument is same as the one we can get > > from the page's inode io_tree, > > > > drop the redundant argument. > > I think there is/was a plan to drop the btree inode? should we need > this argument if the plan is still on? or any idea if it still can > be implemented without this argument? That's a question for the one implementing the btree inode removal. As there are several possible ways how to implement it, with different trade-offs and such, I can't forsee if this particula parameter will be useful or not. And keeping things around for theoretical needs of future patches has proven to not work so we've been removing such artifacts. The exception is of course for patchsets that are in active development and would have to revert the cleanups.
