Re: [PATCH 2/6] btrfs: Change submit_bio_hook to taking an inode directly

[Nikolay Borisov]

On 11.04.19 г. 14:18 ч., Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> On 10/04/2019 16:24, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>> The only possible 'private_data' that is passed to this function is
>> actually an inode. Make that explicit by changing the signature of the
>> call back. No functional changes.
> 
> Can't we change struct extent_io_tree::private_data and
> extent_io_tree_init(..., void *private_data) to be an inode as well?
> 
> If I didn't overlook something we always pass in an inode or NULL.

You are right, latest refactoring I did made it so. I can send patches
atop this series.

David, how do you like to organise this? Resend the series with 2 more
patches in it or shall I send them as separate once this lands?

>