Re: [PATCH] btrfs: check for BTRFS_FS_ERROR in pending ordered assert

[Filipe Manana <fdmanana@kernel.org>]

On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 04:59:04PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> If we do fast tree logging we increment a counter on the current
> transaction for every ordered extent we need to wait for.  This means we
> expect the transaction to still be there when we clear pending on the
> ordered extent.  However if we happen to abort the transaction and clean
> it up, there could be no running transaction, and thus we'll trip the
> 
> ASSERT(trans)
> 
> check.  This is obviously incorrect, and the code properly deals with
> the case that the trans doesn't exist.  Fix this ASSERT() to only fire
> if there's no trans and we don't have BTRFS_FS_ERROR() set on the file
> system.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>

Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>

Looks good, thanks.

> ---
>  fs/btrfs/ordered-data.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ordered-data.c b/fs/btrfs/ordered-data.c
> index 09b274d9ba18..69a2cb50c197 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/ordered-data.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/ordered-data.c
> @@ -659,7 +659,7 @@ void btrfs_remove_ordered_extent(struct btrfs_inode *btrfs_inode,
>  			refcount_inc(&trans->use_count);
>  		spin_unlock(&fs_info->trans_lock);
>  
> -		ASSERT(trans);
> +		ASSERT(trans || BTRFS_FS_ERROR(fs_info));
>  		if (trans) {
>  			if (atomic_dec_and_test(&trans->pending_ordered))
>  				wake_up(&trans->pending_wait);
> -- 
> 2.26.3
>