From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 424F6C10DCE for ; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 17:12:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FBEE20658 for ; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 17:12:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="BZTl32g4" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725935AbgCFRMH (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Mar 2020 12:12:07 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([205.139.110.120]:21509 "EHLO us-smtp-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725873AbgCFRMH (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Mar 2020 12:12:07 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1583514726; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=/GUW9CcI96lFGfpcIa5ZwgP0u8NZJRc+ef1XxjdTgCg=; b=BZTl32g4KCGo0BEvL24LSsPBsTkvxklmSm31Lcoywrg/MY3wGLNkSA3wfMlyGBIVSt9nUF tCqFooKu6H7/cpBhVpN6fYAl0rsoR1/UlnT3l7cstTynVH3JIxP4RJ/yYYkJ9XzV+cuiSS 9tMYzPb9IZI78H6nSnQg/F8ukYif0oI= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-420-QGQ_DNpZPiODSmZtp9BfeQ-1; Fri, 06 Mar 2020 12:12:04 -0500 X-MC-Unique: QGQ_DNpZPiODSmZtp9BfeQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C6DA7184C804; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 17:12:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bfoster (dhcp-41-2.bos.redhat.com [10.18.41.2]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 38BD673892; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 17:12:03 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2020 12:12:01 -0500 From: Brian Foster To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] xfs: remove the aborted parameter to xlog_state_done_syncing Message-ID: <20200306171201.GG2773@bfoster> References: <20200306143137.236478-1-hch@lst.de> <20200306143137.236478-5-hch@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200306143137.236478-5-hch@lst.de> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 06, 2020 at 07:31:34AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > We can just check for a shut down log all the way down in > xlog_cil_committed instead of passing the parameter. This means a > slight behavior change in that we now also abort log items if the > shutdown came in halfway into the I/O completion processing, which > actually is the right thing to do. > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig > --- > fs/xfs/xfs_log.c | 48 +++++++++++++++----------------------------- > fs/xfs/xfs_log.h | 2 +- > fs/xfs/xfs_log_cil.c | 11 +++++----- > 3 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-) > ... > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_log_cil.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_log_cil.c > index 48435cf2aa16..b5c4a45c208c 100644 > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_log_cil.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_log_cil.c ... > @@ -878,7 +877,7 @@ xlog_cil_push( > out_abort_free_ticket: > xfs_log_ticket_put(tic); > out_abort: > - xlog_cil_committed(ctx, true); > + xlog_cil_committed(ctx); Error paths like this might warrant an assert. It's not really clear that we expect to be shutdown based on the context. Otherwise looks Ok. Brian > return -EIO; > } > > -- > 2.24.1 >