xfs: remove the unlock argument to xfs_buf_delwri_queue
We can just unlock the buffer in the caller, and the decrement of b_hold
would also be needed in the !unlock, we just never hit that case currently
given that the caller handles that case.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Elder <aelder@sgi.com>
diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c
index 2e71a26..04689db 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c
@@ -43,7 +43,7 @@
static kmem_zone_t *xfs_buf_zone;
STATIC int xfsbufd(void *);
-STATIC void xfs_buf_delwri_queue(xfs_buf_t *, int);
+STATIC void xfs_buf_delwri_queue(xfs_buf_t *);
static struct workqueue_struct *xfslogd_workqueue;
struct workqueue_struct *xfsdatad_workqueue;
@@ -940,7 +940,7 @@
if ((bp->b_flags & (XBF_DELWRI|_XBF_DELWRI_Q)) == XBF_DELWRI) {
atomic_inc(&bp->b_hold);
bp->b_flags |= XBF_ASYNC;
- xfs_buf_delwri_queue(bp, 0);
+ xfs_buf_delwri_queue(bp);
}
XB_CLEAR_OWNER(bp);
@@ -1049,7 +1049,8 @@
bp->b_flags &= ~XBF_READ;
bp->b_flags |= (XBF_DELWRI | XBF_ASYNC);
- xfs_buf_delwri_queue(bp, 1);
+ xfs_buf_delwri_queue(bp);
+ xfs_buf_unlock(bp);
}
/*
@@ -1562,8 +1563,7 @@
*/
STATIC void
xfs_buf_delwri_queue(
- xfs_buf_t *bp,
- int unlock)
+ xfs_buf_t *bp)
{
struct list_head *dwq = &bp->b_target->bt_delwrite_queue;
spinlock_t *dwlk = &bp->b_target->bt_delwrite_lock;
@@ -1576,8 +1576,7 @@
/* If already in the queue, dequeue and place at tail */
if (!list_empty(&bp->b_list)) {
ASSERT(bp->b_flags & _XBF_DELWRI_Q);
- if (unlock)
- atomic_dec(&bp->b_hold);
+ atomic_dec(&bp->b_hold);
list_del(&bp->b_list);
}
@@ -1590,9 +1589,6 @@
list_add_tail(&bp->b_list, dwq);
bp->b_queuetime = jiffies;
spin_unlock(dwlk);
-
- if (unlock)
- xfs_buf_unlock(bp);
}
void