From: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com>
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] Btrfs: avoid losing data raid profile when deleting a device
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:53:05 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171010175305.31633-1-bo.li.liu@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171009180128.23610-1-bo.li.liu@oracle.com>
We've avoided data losing raid profile when doing balance, but it
turns out that deleting a device could also result in the same
problem.
This fixes the problem by creating an empty data chunk before
relocating the data chunk.
Metadata/System chunk are supposed to have non-zero bytes all the time
so their raid profile is persistent.
Reported-by: James Alandt <James.Alandt@wdc.com>
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com>
---
v2: - return the correct error.
- move helper ahead of __btrfs_balance().
fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 84 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
1 file changed, 65 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
index 4a72c45..a74396d 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
@@ -3018,6 +3018,48 @@ static int btrfs_relocate_sys_chunks(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info)
return ret;
}
+/*
+ * return 1 : allocate a data chunk successfully,
+ * return <0: errors during allocating a data chunk,
+ * return 0 : no need to allocate a data chunk.
+ */
+static int btrfs_may_alloc_data_chunk(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
+ u64 chunk_offset)
+{
+ struct btrfs_block_group_cache *cache;
+ u64 bytes_used;
+ u64 chunk_type;
+
+ cache = btrfs_lookup_block_group(fs_info, chunk_offset);
+ ASSERT(cache);
+ chunk_type = cache->flags;
+ btrfs_put_block_group(cache);
+
+ if (chunk_type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DATA) {
+ spin_lock(&fs_info->data_sinfo->lock);
+ bytes_used = fs_info->data_sinfo->bytes_used;
+ spin_unlock(&fs_info->data_sinfo->lock);
+
+ if (!bytes_used) {
+ struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans;
+ int ret;
+
+ trans = btrfs_join_transaction(fs_info->tree_root);
+ if (IS_ERR(trans))
+ return PTR_ERR(trans);
+
+ ret = btrfs_force_chunk_alloc(trans, fs_info,
+ BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DATA);
+ btrfs_end_transaction(trans);
+ if (ret < 0)
+ return ret;
+
+ return 1;
+ }
+ }
+ return 0;
+}
+
static int insert_balance_item(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
struct btrfs_balance_control *bctl)
{
@@ -3476,7 +3518,6 @@ static int __btrfs_balance(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info)
u32 count_meta = 0;
u32 count_sys = 0;
int chunk_reserved = 0;
- u64 bytes_used = 0;
/* step one make some room on all the devices */
devices = &fs_info->fs_devices->devices;
@@ -3635,28 +3676,21 @@ static int __btrfs_balance(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info)
goto loop;
}
- ASSERT(fs_info->data_sinfo);
- spin_lock(&fs_info->data_sinfo->lock);
- bytes_used = fs_info->data_sinfo->bytes_used;
- spin_unlock(&fs_info->data_sinfo->lock);
-
- if ((chunk_type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DATA) &&
- !chunk_reserved && !bytes_used) {
- trans = btrfs_start_transaction(chunk_root, 0);
- if (IS_ERR(trans)) {
- mutex_unlock(&fs_info->delete_unused_bgs_mutex);
- ret = PTR_ERR(trans);
- goto error;
- }
-
- ret = btrfs_force_chunk_alloc(trans, fs_info,
- BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DATA);
- btrfs_end_transaction(trans);
+ if (!chunk_reserved) {
+ /*
+ * We may be relocating the only data chunk we have,
+ * which could potentially end up with losing data's
+ * raid profile, so lets allocate an empty one in
+ * advance.
+ */
+ ret = btrfs_may_alloc_data_chunk(fs_info,
+ found_key.offset);
if (ret < 0) {
mutex_unlock(&fs_info->delete_unused_bgs_mutex);
goto error;
+ } else if (ret == 1) {
+ chunk_reserved = 1;
}
- chunk_reserved = 1;
}
ret = btrfs_relocate_chunk(fs_info, found_key.offset);
@@ -4419,6 +4453,18 @@ int btrfs_shrink_device(struct btrfs_device *device, u64 new_size)
chunk_offset = btrfs_dev_extent_chunk_offset(l, dev_extent);
btrfs_release_path(path);
+ /*
+ * We may be relocating the only data chunk we have,
+ * which could potentially end up with losing data's
+ * raid profile, so lets allocate an empty one in
+ * advance.
+ */
+ ret = btrfs_may_alloc_data_chunk(fs_info, chunk_offset);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ mutex_unlock(&fs_info->delete_unused_bgs_mutex);
+ goto done;
+ }
+
ret = btrfs_relocate_chunk(fs_info, chunk_offset);
mutex_unlock(&fs_info->delete_unused_bgs_mutex);
if (ret && ret != -ENOSPC)
--
2.9.4
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-10 18:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-10-09 18:01 [PATCH] Btrfs: avoid losing data raid profile when deleting a device Liu Bo
2017-10-10 6:57 ` Nikolay Borisov
2017-10-10 17:39 ` Liu Bo
2017-10-10 17:53 ` Liu Bo [this message]
2017-10-11 7:38 ` [PATCH v2] " Nikolay Borisov
2017-10-13 20:51 ` Liu Bo
2017-10-16 4:22 ` Anand Jain
2017-10-16 17:26 ` Liu Bo
2017-10-16 8:53 ` Nikolay Borisov
2017-10-30 18:43 ` Liu Bo
2017-11-15 23:28 ` [PATCH v3] " Liu Bo
2018-01-05 18:14 ` David Sterba
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=20171010175305.31633-1-bo.li.liu@oracle.com \
--to=bo.li.liu@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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).