linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] btrfs: remove EXTENT_BUFFER_IN

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAPjX3FdLp-niyvQX5vkrPtqwJcRB+hcax=0wRbKdQvJS4T+-PA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 18:07:20 +0100
From: Daniel Vacek <neelx@...e.com>
To: dsterba@...e.cz
Cc: Chris Mason <clm@...com>, Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>, David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>, 
	linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] btrfs: remove EXTENT_BUFFER_IN_TREE flag

On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 at 16:45, David Sterba <dsterba@...e.cz> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 10:54:38AM +0100, Daniel Vacek wrote:
> > This flag is set after inserting the eb to the buffer tree and cleared on
> > it's removal. But it does not bring any added value. Just kill it for good.
>
> Would be good to add the reference to commit that added the bit,
> 34b41acec1ccc0 ("Btrfs: use a bit to track if we're in the radix tree")
> and wanted to make use of it, faa2dbf004e89e ("Btrfs: add sanity tests
> for new qgroup accounting code"). And both are 10+ years old.

Right, I could have checked the history.

Though honestly from the diff of these two commits I don't see any
valid usage of this flag either. Must have been somewhere in the
context or I'm missing something.

> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vacek <neelx@...e.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>