From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mo-p05-ob.rzone.de ([81.169.146.181]:55548 "EHLO
	mo-p05-ob.rzone.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751014Ab3DOMDS (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 15 Apr 2013 08:03:18 -0400
Message-ID: <516BEC83.5080102@gmx.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 14:03:15 +0200
From: Arne Jansen <sensille@gmx.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Wang Shilong <wangshilong1991@gmail.com>
CC: Wang Shilong <wangsl-fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>,
        Linux Btrfs <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>,
        Jan Schmidt <list.btrfs@jan-o-sch.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] Btrfs: fix confusing edquot happening case
References: <516BD85B.3050508@cn.fujitsu.com> <516BDA62.5080008@gmx.net> <2F495469-54F5-40B9-8C4F-91C4E549A42A@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <2F495469-54F5-40B9-8C4F-91C4E549A42A@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-btrfs.vger.kernel.org>

On 15.04.2013 13:43, Wang Shilong wrote:
> Hello Arne,
> 
>> On 15.04.2013 12:37, Wang Shilong wrote:
>>> Step to reproduce:
>>> 	mkfs.btrfs <disk>
>>> 	mount <disk> <mnt>
>>> 	dd if=/dev/zero of=/<mnt>/data bs=1M count=10
>>> 	sync
>>> 	btrfs quota enable <mnt>
>>> 	btrfs qgroup create 0/5 <mnt>
>>> 	btrfs qgroup limit 5M 0/5 <mnt>
>>> 	rm -f /<mnt>/data
>>> 	sync
>>> 	btrfs qgroup show <mnt>
>>> 	dd if=/dev/zero of=data bs=1M count=1
>>>
>>> From the perspective of users, qgroup's referenced or referenced
>>>
>>> is negative,But user can not continue to write data! a workaround
>>> way is to cast u64 to int64 when doing qgroup reservation.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong <wangsl-fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
>>> ---
>>> This confusing edquot may also happen after Jan's qgroup
>>> rescan has been implemented.
>>> ---
>>> fs/btrfs/qgroup.c |    4 ++--
>>> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c b/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c
>>> index b44124d..0178223 100644
>>> --- a/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c
>>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c
>>> @@ -1523,14 +1523,14 @@ int btrfs_qgroup_reserve(struct btrfs_root *root, u64 num_bytes)
>>> 		qg = (struct btrfs_qgroup *)(uintptr_t)unode->aux;
>>>
>>> 		if ((qg->lim_flags & BTRFS_QGROUP_LIMIT_MAX_RFER) &&
>>> -		    qg->reserved + qg->rfer + num_bytes >
>>> +		    qg->reserved + (signed long long)qg->rfer + num_bytes >
>>
>> why not use s64 instead of signed long long? Otherwise this is the right way to
>> solve this.
> 
> Yeah,V2 is coming. By the way, do you mind that i add Acked-by: Arne Jasen <sensille@gmx.net>?

You can add a Reviewed-by: Arne Jansen <sensille@gmx.net>

Thanks,
Arne

> 
> Thanks,
> Wang
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Arne
>>
>>> 		    qg->max_rfer) {
>>> 			ret = -EDQUOT;
>>> 			goto out;
>>> 		}
>>>
>>> 		if ((qg->lim_flags & BTRFS_QGROUP_LIMIT_MAX_EXCL) &&
>>> -		    qg->reserved + qg->excl + num_bytes >
>>> +		    qg->reserved + (signed long long)qg->excl + num_bytes >
>>> 		    qg->max_excl) {
>>> 			ret = -EDQUOT;
>>> 			goto out;
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html