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 04F2329DF5 for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 10:31:35 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D51DB304043 for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 08:31:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from newverein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id rsBbNVppxOB9whOf (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 09 Feb 2016 08:31:32 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 17:31:30 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: reflink log reservations Message-ID: <20160209163130.GA29654@lst.de> References: <20160204074617.GB20496@lst.de> <20160204081620.GL20038@birch.djwong.org> <20160204133133.GA28701@lst.de> <20160204180551.GB27899@birch.djwong.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160204180551.GB27899@birch.djwong.org> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , 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: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com I've still seen the assert a couple of times with the fix, and with yesterdays tree update they are back reproducibly (always in generic/168 over NFS). I suspect the problem is that xfs_refcountbt_alloc_block fully recurses into the allocator and thus could basically double the log reservation. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs