On 11.01.2017 18:51, David Sterba wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 08:35:30PM +0200, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>> After following the discussion in [1] I took a look at what's the
>> state of VFS-related members being used in core BTRFS code. It turned
>> out there are quite a few functions which
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 08:35:30PM +0200, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
> After following the discussion in [1] I took a look at what's the
> state of VFS-related members being used in core BTRFS code. It turned
> out there are quite a few functions which operate on struct btrfs_inode,
> yet take struc
Hello,
After following the discussion in [1] I took a look at what's the
state of VFS-related members being used in core BTRFS code. It turned
out there are quite a few functions which operate on struct btrfs_inode,
yet take struct inode. As a result they have to resort ot excessive
usage of
