From: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/14] xfs: remote attribute allocation may be contiguous
Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 15:03:49 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <519A7395.9060806@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1369007481-15185-9-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com>
On 05/19/2013 07:51 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
>
> When CRCs are enabled, there may be multiple allocations made if the
> headers cause a length overflow. This, however, does not mean that
> the number of headers required increases, as the second and
> subsequent extents may be contiguous with the previous extent. Hence
> when we map the extents to write the attribute data, we may end up
> with less extents than allocations made. Hence the assertion that we
> consume th enumber of headers we calculated in the allocation loop
> is incorrect and needs to be removed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
> ---
> fs/xfs/xfs_attr_remote.c | 6 +++++-
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_attr_remote.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_attr_remote.c
> index dee8446..aad95b0 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_attr_remote.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_attr_remote.c
> @@ -359,6 +359,11 @@ xfs_attr_rmtval_set(
> * into requiring more blocks. e.g. for 512 byte blocks, we'll
> * spill for another block every 9 headers we require in this
> * loop.
> + *
> + * Note that this can result in contiguous allocation of blocks,
> + * so we don't use all the space we allocate for headers as we
> + * have one less header for each contiguous allocation that
> + * occurs in the map/write loop below.
> */
> if (crcs && blkcnt == 0) {
> int total_len;
> @@ -439,7 +444,6 @@ xfs_attr_rmtval_set(
> lblkno += map.br_blockcount;
> }
> ASSERT(valuelen == 0);
> - ASSERT(hdrcnt == 0);
I can't say I grok the context enough atm to send a Reviewed-by, but if
we're removing this, why not just remove the hdrcnt-- a few lines up as
well? It doesn't appear to be used after the first loop at this point.
Brian
> return 0;
> }
>
>
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-20 18:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-19 23:51 [PATCH 00/14] xfs: fixes for 3.10-rc2 (update) Dave Chinner
2013-05-19 23:51 ` [PATCH 01/14] xfs: fix sub-page blocksize data integrity writes Dave Chinner
2013-05-20 18:02 ` Brian Foster
2013-05-20 19:18 ` Ben Myers
2013-05-19 23:51 ` [PATCH 02/14] xfs: fix rounding in xfs_free_file_space Dave Chinner
2013-05-20 18:03 ` Brian Foster
2013-05-19 23:51 ` [PATCH 03/14] xfs: Don't reference the EFI after it is freed Dave Chinner
2013-05-20 18:03 ` Brian Foster
2013-05-19 23:51 ` [PATCH 04/14] xfs: avoid nesting transactions in xfs_qm_scall_setqlim() Dave Chinner
2013-05-20 18:03 ` Brian Foster
2013-05-21 0:06 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-21 0:36 ` [PATCH 04/14 V2] " Dave Chinner
2013-05-21 10:51 ` Brian Foster
2013-05-19 23:51 ` [PATCH 05/14] xfs: fix missing KM_NOFS tags to keep lockdep happy Dave Chinner
2013-05-20 21:16 ` Ben Myers
2013-05-21 0:08 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-19 23:51 ` [PATCH 06/14] xfs: xfs_da3_node_read_verify() doesn't handle XFS_ATTR3_LEAF_MAGIC Dave Chinner
2013-05-20 21:32 ` Ben Myers
2013-05-19 23:51 ` [PATCH 07/14] xfs: xfs_attr_shortform_allfit() does not handle attr3 format Dave Chinner
2013-05-20 21:52 ` Ben Myers
2013-05-19 23:51 ` [PATCH 08/14] xfs: remote attribute allocation may be contiguous Dave Chinner
2013-05-20 19:03 ` Brian Foster [this message]
2013-05-20 22:04 ` Ben Myers
2013-05-21 0:25 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-19 23:51 ` [PATCH 09/14] xfs: remote attribute lookups require the value length Dave Chinner
2013-05-20 22:15 ` Ben Myers
2013-05-19 23:51 ` [PATCH 10/14] xfs: remote attribute read too short Dave Chinner
2013-05-20 23:00 ` Ben Myers
2013-05-19 23:51 ` [PATCH 11/14] xfs: remote attribute tail zeroing does too much Dave Chinner
2013-05-20 23:01 ` Ben Myers
2013-05-19 23:51 ` [PATCH 12/14] xfs: correctly map remote attr buffers during removal Dave Chinner
2013-05-19 23:51 ` [PATCH 13/14] xfs: fully initialise temp leaf in xfs_attr3_leaf_unbalance Dave Chinner
2013-05-19 23:51 ` [PATCH 14/14] xfs: fully initialise temp leaf in xfs_attr3_leaf_compact Dave Chinner
2013-05-20 19:37 ` [PATCH 00/14] xfs: fixes for 3.10-rc2 (update) Ben Myers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=519A7395.9060806@redhat.com \
--to=bfoster@redhat.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox