From 8304ad4dc818ffd701c2f3e90683b5b8013f44e2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Kent Overstreet Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 17:20:00 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] bcache: Remove unnecessary check in should_split() Checking i->seq was redundant, because since ages ago we always initialize the new bset when advancing b->written Signed-off-by: Kent Overstreet --- drivers/md/bcache/btree.h | 5 ++--- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/md/bcache/btree.h b/drivers/md/bcache/btree.h index 3333d37..8a1c7e6 100644 --- a/drivers/md/bcache/btree.h +++ b/drivers/md/bcache/btree.h @@ -353,7 +353,7 @@ static inline void rw_unlock(bool w, struct btree *b) _w == insert_lock(op, _b)) \ _r = bch_btree_ ## fn(_b, op, ##__VA_ARGS__); \ rw_unlock(_w, _b); \ - bch_cannibalize_unlock(c, &(op)->cl); \ + bch_cannibalize_unlock(c, &(op)->cl); \ } while (_r == -EINTR); \ \ _r; \ @@ -363,8 +363,7 @@ static inline bool should_split(struct btree *b) { struct bset *i = write_block(b); return b->written >= btree_blocks(b) || - (i->seq == b->sets[0].data->seq && - b->written + __set_blocks(i, i->keys + 15, b->c) + (b->written + __set_blocks(i, i->keys + 15, b->c) > btree_blocks(b)); } -- 2.7.4