btrfs: alloc_chunk: improve chunk size variable name

The variable num_bytes is really a way too generic name for a variable
in this function. There are a dozen other variables that hold a number
of bytes as value.

Give it a name that actually describes what it does, which is holding
the size of the chunk that we're allocating.

Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Hans van Kranenburg <hans.van.kranenburg@mendix.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
This commit is contained in:
Hans van Kranenburg 2018-10-04 23:24:39 +02:00 committed by David Sterba
parent 2f29df4fc2
commit 23f0ff1ec4
1 changed files with 5 additions and 5 deletions

View File

@ -4632,7 +4632,7 @@ static int __btrfs_alloc_chunk(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
u64 max_stripe_size;
u64 max_chunk_size;
u64 stripe_size;
u64 num_bytes;
u64 chunk_size;
int ndevs;
int i;
int j;
@ -4834,9 +4834,9 @@ static int __btrfs_alloc_chunk(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
map->type = type;
map->sub_stripes = sub_stripes;
num_bytes = stripe_size * data_stripes;
chunk_size = stripe_size * data_stripes;
trace_btrfs_chunk_alloc(info, map, start, num_bytes);
trace_btrfs_chunk_alloc(info, map, start, chunk_size);
em = alloc_extent_map();
if (!em) {
@ -4847,7 +4847,7 @@ static int __btrfs_alloc_chunk(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
set_bit(EXTENT_FLAG_FS_MAPPING, &em->flags);
em->map_lookup = map;
em->start = start;
em->len = num_bytes;
em->len = chunk_size;
em->block_start = 0;
em->block_len = em->len;
em->orig_block_len = stripe_size;
@ -4865,7 +4865,7 @@ static int __btrfs_alloc_chunk(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
refcount_inc(&em->refs);
write_unlock(&em_tree->lock);
ret = btrfs_make_block_group(trans, 0, type, start, num_bytes);
ret = btrfs_make_block_group(trans, 0, type, start, chunk_size);
if (ret)
goto error_del_extent;