From: Filipe Manana <fdman...@suse.com>
Instead of exposing implementation details of the tree mod log to check
if there are active tree mod log users at btrfs_free_tree_block(), use
the new bit BTRFS_FS_TREE_MOD_LOG_USERS for fs_info->flags instead. This
way extent-tree.c does not need to known about any of the internals of
the tree mod log and avoids taking a lock unnecessarily as well.
Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdman...@suse.com>
---
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 8 +++-----
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
index 2482b26b1971..7a28314189b4 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
@@ -3342,11 +3342,9 @@ void btrfs_free_tree_block(struct btrfs_trans_handle
*trans,
* find a node pointing to this leaf and record operations that
* point to this leaf.
*/
- if (btrfs_header_level(buf) == 0) {
- read_lock(&fs_info->tree_mod_log_lock);
- must_pin = !list_empty(&fs_info->tree_mod_seq_list);
- read_unlock(&fs_info->tree_mod_log_lock);
- }
+ if (btrfs_header_level(buf) == 0 &&
+ test_bit(BTRFS_FS_TREE_MOD_LOG_USERS, &fs_info->flags))
+ must_pin = true;
if (must_pin || btrfs_is_zoned(fs_info)) {
btrfs_redirty_list_add(trans->transaction, buf);
--
2.28.0
