From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.29]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B97E529E12 for ; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 08:29:39 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AF9830404E for ; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 06:29:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 7DInGj3TSQhwxaeE (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 06:29:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B6CA3C0B78A0 for ; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 14:29:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bfoster.bfoster (dhcp-41-22.bos.redhat.com [10.18.41.22]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u1TETVG9005216 for ; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 09:29:31 -0500 From: Brian Foster Subject: [PATCH v2 0/3] fix up indlen reservations on extent split Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 09:29:27 -0500 Message-Id: <1456756170-51248-1-git-send-email-bfoster@redhat.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: xfs@oss.sgi.com Hi all, This is a resurrection of an old fix for the indirect delalloc reservation split problem. The last version apparently fell through the cracks. The core problem and fix is the same and is described in patch 3. The original problem is not as reproducible as it was since the last version of this patch. The original zero range reproducer doesn't work because zero range has since been updated to flush and invalidate the affected range rather than kill any delayed allocation blocks in the in core extent tree. The side effect of this is that the problem does not currently have a clear reproducer, but the indirect reservation management code is still incorrect nonetheless. As a result, I've prepended an RFC test instrumentation patch that can help induce the problem[1]. I've marked the patch RFC simply because it is hacky and probably up in the air as to whether it is merge worthy. I wanted to have _something_ to help reproduce the problem and verify the fix, however, hence it is included here. I'm fine with either merging it or using it as a one-off verification and dropping it. Also, any other ideas for a more simple/elegant reproducer are welcome. Thoughts, reviews, flames appreciated. Brian [1] An update to the original xfstests test is also required. I'll send that update in a reply to this cover letter shortly. v2: - Rebase to latest for-next branch. - Include RFC test instrumentation patch. v1: http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2014-10/msg00294.html - xfs_bunmapi() code into independent patch. - Refactor fix into separate helper function. rfc: http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2014-09/msg00337.html Brian Foster (3): xfs: debug mode forced buffered write failure xfs: update icsb freeblocks counter after extent deletion xfs: borrow indirect blocks from freed extent when available fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c | 158 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c | 9 ++- fs/xfs/xfs_mount.h | 9 +++ fs/xfs/xfs_sysfs.c | 78 ++++++++++++++++++++--- 4 files changed, 200 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-) -- 2.4.3 _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs