From: Kent Overstreet <kmo@daterainc.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 00:20:00 +0000 (-0700)
Subject: bcache: Remove unnecessary check in should_split()
X-Git-Tag: next-20130912~34^2~6^2~46
X-Git-Url: https://git.karo-electronics.de/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=6594e92f9c70d65516629b9a8e18ecf48b2ff477;p=karo-tx-linux.git

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 <kmo@daterainc.com>
---

diff --git a/drivers/md/bcache/btree.h b/drivers/md/bcache/btree.h
index 3333d3723633..8a1c7e6bbbe3 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));
 }