Linux Btrfs filesystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Johannes Thumshirn <Johannes.Thumshirn@wdc.com>
To: Johannes Thumshirn <jth@kernel.org>, Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>,
	Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>,
	David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Cc: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>,
	"linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/14] btrfs: more RST delete fixes
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2025 15:41:06 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4b700c13-0e9e-4ea5-bab5-24290babfe94@wdc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250109-rst-delete-fixes-v3-0-b5c73a4b2a80@kernel.org>

On 09.01.25 16:15, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> Here's another set of fixes for the delete path on RAID stripe-tree backed
> filesystems.
> 
> Josef's CI system started tripping over a bad key order due to the usage
> of btrfs_set_item_key_safe() in btrfs_partially_delete_raid_extent() and
> while investigating what is happening there I found more bugs and not
> handled corner cases, which resulted in more fixes and test-cases.
> 
> Unfortunately I couldn't fix the bad key order problem and had to resort
> to re-creating the item in btrfs_partially_delete_raid_extent() and insert
> the new one after deleting the old.
> 
> Fstests btrfs/06* are extremely good in exhibiting these failures and
> btrfs/060 has been extensively run while developing this series.
> 
> A full CI run of v1 can be found here:
> https://github.com/btrfs/linux/actions/runs/12291668397
> 
> Changes to v1:
> - Handle extent_map lookup failure in 1/14
> - Don't use key.offset = -1 for initial search in 3/14
> - Don't break before calling btrfs_previous_item if we're on slot 0 in
>    6/14
> - Remove btrfs_mark_buffer_dirty calls
> - Remove line breaks at 80 chars if we're just a bit over
> - Fix multiple issues on comment styling
> 
> Link to v1:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/cover.1733989299.git.jth@kernel.org
> 
> Note:
> I did not copy the implementation of btrfs_drop_extents() as I'd like to
> have feedback on this variant first, before putting the time and energy in
> a "completely new" implementation.
> 
> ---
> Changes in v3:
> - Drop patch "btrfs: fix search when deleting a RAID stripe-extent"
> - Split out setting the incompat flag in the seftests code from patch 1
> - Rework changelog of 2/13
> - Rename the new stripe_extent item to newitem instead of just 'new' in
>    8/13
> - Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250107-rst-delete-fixes-v2-0-0c7b14c0aac2@kernel.org
> 
> ---
> Johannes Thumshirn (14):
>        btrfs: selftests: correct RAID stripe-tree feature flag setting
>        btrfs: don't try to delete RAID stripe-extents if we don't need to
>        btrfs: assert RAID stripe-extent length is always greater than 0
>        btrfs: fix front delete range calculation for RAID stripe extents
>        btrfs: fix tail delete of RAID stripe-extents
>        btrfs: fix deletion of a range spanning parts two RAID stripe extents
>        btrfs: implement hole punching for RAID stripe extents
>        btrfs: don't use btrfs_set_item_key_safe on RAID stripe-extents
>        btrfs: selftests: check for correct return value of failed lookup
>        btrfs: selftests: don't split RAID extents in half
>        btrfs: selftests: test RAID stripe-tree deletion spanning two items
>        btrfs: selftests: add selftest for punching holes into the RAID stripe extents
>        btrfs: selftests: add test for punching a hole into 3 RAID stripe-extents
>        btrfs: selftests: add a selftest for deleting two out of three extents
> 
>   fs/btrfs/ctree.c                        |   1 +
>   fs/btrfs/raid-stripe-tree.c             | 138 ++++++-
>   fs/btrfs/tests/raid-stripe-tree-tests.c | 660 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>   3 files changed, 770 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
> ---
> base-commit: 1f79f5757e9e4944b1c8490b495e8619974d788b
> change-id: 20241218-rst-delete-fixes-f2659047f627
> 
> Best regards,

Please ignore v3, I'll send out a v4 tomorrow

      parent reply	other threads:[~2025-01-09 15:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-01-09 15:15 [PATCH v3 00/14] btrfs: more RST delete fixes Johannes Thumshirn
2025-01-09 15:15 ` [PATCH v3 01/14] btrfs: selftests: correct RAID stripe-tree feature flag setting Johannes Thumshirn
2025-01-09 15:31   ` Johannes Thumshirn
2025-01-09 15:15 ` [PATCH v3 02/14] btrfs: don't try to delete RAID stripe-extents if we don't need to Johannes Thumshirn
2025-01-09 15:15 ` [PATCH v3 03/14] btrfs: assert RAID stripe-extent length is always greater than 0 Johannes Thumshirn
2025-01-09 15:15 ` [PATCH v3 04/14] btrfs: fix front delete range calculation for RAID stripe extents Johannes Thumshirn
2025-01-09 15:15 ` [PATCH v3 05/14] btrfs: fix tail delete of RAID stripe-extents Johannes Thumshirn
2025-01-09 15:15 ` [PATCH v3 06/14] btrfs: fix deletion of a range spanning parts two RAID stripe extents Johannes Thumshirn
2025-01-09 15:15 ` [PATCH v3 07/14] btrfs: implement hole punching for " Johannes Thumshirn
2025-01-09 15:15 ` [PATCH v3 08/14] btrfs: don't use btrfs_set_item_key_safe on RAID stripe-extents Johannes Thumshirn
2025-01-09 15:15 ` [PATCH v3 09/14] btrfs: selftests: check for correct return value of failed lookup Johannes Thumshirn
2025-01-09 15:15 ` [PATCH v3 10/14] btrfs: selftests: don't split RAID extents in half Johannes Thumshirn
2025-01-09 15:15 ` [PATCH v3 11/14] btrfs: selftests: test RAID stripe-tree deletion spanning two items Johannes Thumshirn
2025-01-09 15:15 ` [PATCH v3 12/14] btrfs: selftests: add selftest for punching holes into the RAID stripe extents Johannes Thumshirn
2025-01-09 15:15 ` [PATCH v3 13/14] btrfs: selftests: add test for punching a hole into 3 RAID stripe-extents Johannes Thumshirn
2025-01-09 15:15 ` [PATCH v3 14/14] btrfs: selftests: add a selftest for deleting two out of three extents Johannes Thumshirn
2025-01-09 15:41 ` Johannes Thumshirn [this message]

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=4b700c13-0e9e-4ea5-bab5-24290babfe94@wdc.com \
    --to=johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com \
    --cc=clm@fb.com \
    --cc=dsterba@suse.com \
    --cc=fdmanana@suse.com \
    --cc=josef@toxicpanda.com \
    --cc=jth@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@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