From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CF657CA2 for ; Sat, 13 Feb 2016 01:48:35 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D3F88F8039 for ; Fri, 12 Feb 2016 23:48:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id GcwZFvPtZhyxA4F2 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 12 Feb 2016 23:48:29 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 23:48:27 -0800 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: block allocations for the refcount btree Message-ID: <20160213074827.GA11543@infradead.org> References: <20160210093011.GA19147@infradead.org> <20160210095010.GC23904@birch.djwong.org> <20160210190738.GA13051@infradead.org> <20160210214058.GN14668@dastard> <20160212191046.GA28421@infradead.org> <20160213023310.GC14668@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160213023310.GC14668@dastard> 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: Dave Chinner Cc: Christoph Hellwig , xfs@oss.sgi.com, "Darrick J. Wong" On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 01:33:10PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > allocate an extent (or rather just a single block) in xfs_alloc_ag_vextent > > as called from xfs_refcountbt_alloc_block. The reservation helps us to > > ensure this block is always available, but we still need to account for > > that in xfs_trans_reserve(), which we currently don't do for itruncate > > transactions. > > Ok, so we may have two different issues with a similar failure > symptom. As it is, I don't think this is a show stopper - we're > expecting to find these sorts of issues as we go along (hence the > experimental tag on the feature) and I think, at this point, getting > review and an initial merge done is more important... This triggers 100% reproducible over NFS, and as outlined I'm also pretty sure about the root cause. I don't think this is something to be ignored. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs