Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 30 Jun 2020 23:21:04 -0400
From:   Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
To:     Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org,
        Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>,
        David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.19 011/131] btrfs: make caching_thread use
 btrfs_find_next_key
Message-ID: <20200701032104.GA1931@sasha-vm>
References: <20200629153502.2494656-1-sashal@kernel.org>
 <20200629153502.2494656-12-sashal@kernel.org>
 <20200630210921.GA2728@duo.ucw.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200630210921.GA2728@duo.ucw.cz>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 11:09:21PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
>On Mon 2020-06-29 11:33:02, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> From: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
>>
>> [ Upstream commit 6a9fb468f1152d6254f49fee6ac28c3cfa3367e5 ]
>>
>> extent-tree.c has a find_next_key that just walks up the path to find
>> the next key, but it is used for both the caching stuff and the snapshot
>> delete stuff.  The snapshot deletion stuff is special so it can't really
>> use btrfs_find_next_key, but the caching thread stuff can.  We just need
>> to fix btrfs_find_next_key to deal with ->skip_locking and then it works
>> exactly the same as the private find_next_key helper.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
>> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
>
>According to changelog, this is not known to fix a bug. Why is it
>needed in stable?

Right. I've dropped it, thanks!


-- 
Thanks,
Sasha