From: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
To: Zach Brown <zab@redhat.com>
Cc: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>, <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: don't delete ordered roots from list during cleanup
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 11:36:02 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130930153602.GN18681@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130927231814.GB30372@lenny.home.zabbo.net>
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 04:18:14PM -0700, Zach Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 04:37:46PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > During transaction cleanup after an abort we are just removing roots from the
> > ordered roots list which is incorrect. We have a BUG_ON() to make sure that the
> > root is still part of the ordered roots list when we put our ordered extent
> > which we were tripping in this case. So do like we do everywhere else and just
> > move it to the tail of the ordered roots list and allow the normal cleanup to
> > take care of stuff. Thanks,
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
> > ---
> > fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 3 ++-
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
> > index f38211f..872b4ce 100644
> > --- a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
> > +++ b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
> > @@ -3835,7 +3835,8 @@ static void btrfs_destroy_all_ordered_extents(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info)
> > while (!list_empty(&splice)) {
> > root = list_first_entry(&splice, struct btrfs_root,
> > ordered_root);
> > - list_del_init(&root->ordered_root);
> > + list_move_tail(&root->ordered_root,
> > + &fs_info->ordered_roots);
>
> This function basically only does:
>
> lock
> list_for_each
> lock
> list_for_each
> set_bit
>
> Could we instead add a bit to the root or trans or fs_info or anything
> else that could be trivialy set in _destroy_all_ordered_extents and
> tested in _finish_ordered_io()? It'd remove a bunch of tedious locking
> and iteration here.
>
> The similar metaphor in the core page cache is (address_space->flags |
> AS_EIO).
>
> Would that be too coarse or racey?
So I _think_ we may need to truncate the ordered range in the inode as well, but
I haven't had a consistent reproducer for this case. I want to leave it like
this for now until I'm sure we don't need the truncate and then we could
probably just replace this with a test for FS_ERROR in finish_ordered_io.
Thanks,
Josef
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-30 15:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-27 20:37 [PATCH] Btrfs: don't delete ordered roots from list during cleanup Josef Bacik
2013-09-27 23:18 ` Zach Brown
2013-09-30 15:36 ` Josef Bacik [this message]
2013-09-30 17:34 ` Zach Brown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130930153602.GN18681@localhost.localdomain \
--to=jbacik@fusionio.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=zab@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).