[Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Ocfs2: Re-access the journal after ocfs2_insert_extent() in dxdir codes.

[tristan <tristan.ye@oracle.com>]

Mark Fasheh wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 08, 2010 at 05:12:38PM +0800, Tristan Ye wrote:
>> In ocfs2_dx_dir_rebalance(), we need to rejournal_acess the blocks after
>> calling ocfs2_insert_extent() since growing an extent tree may trigger
>> ocfs2_extend_trans(), which makes previous journal_access meaningless.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tristan Ye <tristan.ye@oracle.com>
>> ---
>>  fs/ocfs2/dir.c |   24 ++++++++++++++++--------
>>  1 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/dir.c b/fs/ocfs2/dir.c
>> index f04ebcf..c49f6de 100644
>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/dir.c
>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/dir.c
>> @@ -3931,6 +3931,15 @@ static int ocfs2_dx_dir_rebalance(struct ocfs2_super *osb, struct inode *dir,
>>  		goto out_commit;
>>  	}
>>  
>> +	cpos = split_hash;
>> +	ret = ocfs2_dx_dir_new_cluster(dir, &et, cpos, handle,
>> +				       data_ac, meta_ac, new_dx_leaves,
>> +				       num_dx_leaves);
>> +	if (ret) {
>> +		mlog_errno(ret);
>> +		goto out_commit;
>> +	}
>> +
>>  	for (i = 0; i < num_dx_leaves; i++) {
>>  		ret = ocfs2_journal_access_dl(handle, INODE_CACHE(dir),
>>  					      orig_dx_leaves[i],
>
> Ok, I see what you're going for here. Don't we still need to add a
> journal_access_dl call against new_dx_leaves[i] in the for loop though? They
> will be dirtied again in ocfs2_dx_dir_transfer_leaf.

Didn't I?

This patch already had the codes calling the journal_access_dl against 
new_dx_leaves.

Look at the second portion of this patch, that is it.



> 	--Mark
>
> --
> Mark Fasheh