[PATCH AUTOSEL 5.10 019/114] btrfs: avoid linker error in btrfs_find_create_tree_block()

[PATCH AUTOSEL 5.10 019/114] btrfs: avoid linker error in btrfs_find_create_tree_block()

[Sasha Levin]

From: Mark Harmstone <maharmstone@fb.com>

[ Upstream commit 7ef3cbf17d2734ca66c4ed8573be45f4e461e7ee ]

The inline function btrfs_is_testing() is hardcoded to return 0 if
CONFIG_BTRFS_FS_RUN_SANITY_TESTS is not set. Currently we're relying on
the compiler optimizing out the call to alloc_test_extent_buffer() in
btrfs_find_create_tree_block(), as it's not been defined (it's behind an
 #ifdef).

Add a stub version of alloc_test_extent_buffer() to avoid linker errors
on non-standard optimization levels. This problem was seen on GCC 14
with -O0 and is helps to see symbols that would be otherwise optimized
out.

Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Mark Harmstone <maharmstone@fb.com>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
---
 fs/btrfs/extent_io.c | 7 +++++--
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c b/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c
index 9cef930c4ecfb..8498994ef5c6d 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c
@@ -5134,10 +5134,10 @@ struct extent_buffer *find_extent_buffer(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
 	return NULL;
 }
 
-#ifdef CONFIG_BTRFS_FS_RUN_SANITY_TESTS
 struct extent_buffer *alloc_test_extent_buffer(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
 					u64 start)
 {
+#ifdef CONFIG_BTRFS_FS_RUN_SANITY_TESTS
 	struct extent_buffer *eb, *exists = NULL;
 	int ret;
 
@@ -5173,8 +5173,11 @@ struct extent_buffer *alloc_test_extent_buffer(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
 free_eb:
 	btrfs_release_extent_buffer(eb);
 	return exists;
-}
+#else
+	/* Stub to avoid linker error when compiled with optimizations turned off. */
+	return NULL;
 #endif
+}
 
 struct extent_buffer *alloc_extent_buffer(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
 					  u64 start)
-- 
2.39.5

[PATCH AUTOSEL 5.10 020/114] btrfs: send: return -ENAMETOOLONG when attempting a path that is too long

[Sasha Levin]

From: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>

[ Upstream commit a77749b3e21813566cea050bbb3414ae74562eba ]

When attempting to build a too long path we are currently returning
-ENOMEM, which is very odd and misleading. So update fs_path_ensure_buf()
to return -ENAMETOOLONG instead. Also, while at it, move the WARN_ON()
into the if statement's expression, as it makes it clear what is being
tested and also has the effect of adding 'unlikely' to the statement,
which allows the compiler to generate better code as this condition is
never expected to happen.

Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
---
 fs/btrfs/send.c | 6 ++----
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/btrfs/send.c b/fs/btrfs/send.c
index a9e72f42e91e0..3e7bb24eb2276 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/send.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/send.c
@@ -390,10 +390,8 @@ static int fs_path_ensure_buf(struct fs_path *p, int len)
 	if (p->buf_len >= len)
 		return 0;
 
-	if (len > PATH_MAX) {
-		WARN_ON(1);
-		return -ENOMEM;
-	}
+	if (WARN_ON(len > PATH_MAX))
+		return -ENAMETOOLONG;
 
 	path_len = p->end - p->start;
 	old_buf_len = p->buf_len;
-- 
2.39.5