From: liubo <liubo2009@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
Cc: linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>, josef <josef@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] Btrfs: introduce sub transaction stuff
Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 06:21:04 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DDCD810.7090904@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4DDC7E08.4020207@cn.fujitsu.com>
On 05/24/2011 11:56 PM, liubo wrote:
>> > The problems I hit:
>> >
>> > When an inode is dropped from cache (just via iput) and then read in
>> > again, the BTRFS_I(inode)->logged_trans goes back to zero. When this
>> > happens the logging code assumes the inode isn't in the log and hits
>> > -EEXIST if it finds inode items.
>> >
>
> ok, I just find where the problem addresses. This is because I've put
> a check between logged_trans and transaction_id, which is inclined to
> filter those that are first logged, and I'm sorry for not taking the
> 'iput' stuff into consideration. And it's easy to fix this, as we
> can just kick this check off and put another check while searching
> 'BTRFS_INODE_ITEM_KEY', since if we cannot find a inode item in a tree,
> it proves that this inode is definitely not in the tree.
>
> So I'd like to make some changes like this patch(_UNTEST_):
I've thought of this problem more and came up with a _better and more efficient_ patch.
It will always get BTRFS_I(inode)->logged_trans correct value.
But I'm still trying to test it somehow... :P
Here it is:
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
index 40f6f8f..d22b3bf 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
@@ -1769,12 +1769,9 @@ static int btrfs_finish_ordered_io(struct inode *inode, u64 start, u64 end)
add_pending_csums(trans, inode, ordered_extent->file_offset,
&ordered_extent->list);
- ret = btrfs_ordered_update_i_size(inode, 0, ordered_extent);
- if (!ret) {
- ret = btrfs_update_inode(trans, root, inode);
- BUG_ON(ret);
- } else
- btrfs_set_inode_last_trans(trans, inode);
+ btrfs_ordered_update_i_size(inode, 0, ordered_extent);
+ ret = btrfs_update_inode(trans, root, inode);
+ BUG_ON(ret);
ret = 0;
out:
if (nolock) {
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c
index 912397c..92fe5dd 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c
@@ -3032,6 +3032,37 @@ out:
return ret;
}
+static int check_logged_trans(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
+ struct btrfs_root *root, struct inode *inode)
+{
+ struct btrfs_inode_item *inode_item;
+ struct btrfs_path *path;
+ int ret;
+
+ path = btrfs_alloc_path();
+ if (!path)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
+ ret = btrfs_search_slot(trans, root,
+ &BTRFS_I(inode)->location, path, 0, 0);
+ if (ret) {
+ if (ret > 0)
+ ret = 0;
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ btrfs_unlock_up_safe(path, 1);
+ inode_item = btrfs_item_ptr(path->nodes[0], path->slots[0],
+ struct btrfs_inode_item);
+
+ BTRFS_I(inode)->logged_trans = btrfs_inode_transid(path->nodes[0],
+ inode_item);
+out:
+ btrfs_free_path(path);
+ return ret;
+}
+
+
static int inode_in_log(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
struct inode *inode)
{
@@ -3084,6 +3115,18 @@ int btrfs_log_inode_parent(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
if (ret)
goto end_no_trans;
+ /*
+ * After we iput a inode and reread it from disk, logged_trans is 0.
+ * However, this inode _may_ still remain in log tree and not be
+ * committed yet.
+ * So we need to check the log tree to get logged_trans a right value.
+ */
+ if (!BTRFS_I(inode)->logged_trans && root->log_root) {
+ ret = check_logged_trans(trans, root->log_root, inode);
+ if (ret)
+ goto end_no_trans;
+ }
+
if (inode_in_log(trans, inode)) {
ret = BTRFS_NO_LOG_SYNC;
goto end_no_trans;
thanks,
liubo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-25 10:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-19 8:11 [PATCH 0/9] Btrfs: improve write ahead log with sub transaction Liu Bo
2011-05-19 8:11 ` [PATCH 1/9] Btrfs: introduce sub transaction stuff Liu Bo
2011-05-20 0:23 ` Chris Mason
2011-05-20 0:53 ` liubo
2011-05-23 14:40 ` Chris Mason
2011-05-25 3:56 ` liubo
2011-05-25 10:21 ` liubo [this message]
2011-05-24 11:34 ` Chris Mason
2011-05-26 2:48 ` liubo
2011-05-19 8:11 ` [PATCH 2/9] Btrfs: update block generation if should_cow_block fails Liu Bo
2011-05-19 8:11 ` [PATCH 3/9] Btrfs: modify btrfs_drop_extents API Liu Bo
2011-05-19 8:11 ` [PATCH 4/9] Btrfs: introduce first sub trans Liu Bo
2011-05-19 8:11 ` [PATCH 5/9] Btrfs: still update inode trans stuff when size remains unchanged Liu Bo
2011-05-19 8:11 ` [PATCH 6/9] Btrfs: improve log with sub transaction Liu Bo
2011-05-19 8:11 ` [PATCH 7/9] Btrfs: add checksum check for log Liu Bo
2011-05-19 8:11 ` [PATCH 8/9] Btrfs: fix a bug of log check Liu Bo
2011-05-19 8:11 ` [PATCH 9/9] Btrfs: kick off useless code Liu Bo
2011-05-19 8:14 ` [PATCH 0/9] Btrfs: improve write ahead log with sub transaction liubo
2011-05-23 16:43 ` Josef Bacik
2011-05-24 1:29 ` liubo
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=4DDCD810.7090904@cn.fujitsu.com \
--to=liubo2009@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=josef@redhat.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).