Re: [PATCH v2] btrfs: do not skip re-registration for the mounted device

[Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com>]

On 2/22/24 03:19, David Sterba wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 10:09:59PM +0530, Anand Jain wrote:
>> On 2/20/24 23:42, David Sterba wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 02:08:00PM +0000, Filipe Manana wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 7:17 AM David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 09:13:56AM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
>>>>> https://btrfs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/dev/Developer-s-FAQ.html#ordering
>>>>
>>>> So this introduces a regression.
>>>>
>>>> $ ./check btrfs/14[6-9] btrfs/15[8-9]
>>>
>>> Thanks, with this I can reproduce it and have some ideas what could go
>>> wrong.
>>
>> Thanks indeed.
> 
> I tested the following, it fixes the fsid problems and has passed full
> fstests run. The temp-fsid test coverage needs to be done still.
> 
> @@ -1388,6 +1388,10 @@ struct btrfs_device *btrfs_scan_one_device(const char *path, blk_mode_t flags,
>          if (ret)
>                  btrfs_warn(NULL, "lookup bdev failed for path %s: %d",
>                             path, ret);
> +       if (devt) {
> +               printk(KERN_ERR "free stale devt (for path %s)\n", path);
> +               btrfs_free_stale_devices(devt, NULL);
> +       }

Right. I had this in mind to check for the stale devices. I'll do.

Anand