From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 10D036FB1; Tue, 5 Dec 2023 03:35:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b="lj0ywqlG" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9DAB8C433C8; Tue, 5 Dec 2023 03:35:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1701747346; bh=O9dEsog5afVs6sk01wRPC+IdOBMSJ9X1yPlP7ce27j0=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=lj0ywqlG8s+1QlWHVzWA5/3fdG+6zW36mhHC/pBEh0cwE9BEYxj8HuJT/wgvG88ye FzANEiV3biGXZAwaQpMbv75LY1CZjKK3KoUrg9F5dDZL9bD+zNEK3qUdGIPBVVre0Q TCwpRGd38/cfEM3f/PANwi4PE2CvpB9/pOb9kpUw= From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: stable@vger.kernel.org Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , patches@lists.linux.dev, Jan Kara , Baokun Li , Theodore Tso , Sasha Levin Subject: [PATCH 5.10 042/135] ext4: using nofail preallocation in ext4_es_remove_extent() Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2023 12:16:03 +0900 Message-ID: <20231205031533.242518140@linuxfoundation.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.43.0 In-Reply-To: <20231205031530.557782248@linuxfoundation.org> References: <20231205031530.557782248@linuxfoundation.org> User-Agent: quilt/0.67 X-stable: review X-Patchwork-Hint: ignore Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 5.10-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ From: Baokun Li [ Upstream commit e9fe2b882bd5b26b987c9ba110c2222796f72af5 ] If __es_remove_extent() returns an error it means that when splitting extent, allocating an extent that must be kept failed, where returning an error directly would cause the extent tree to be inconsistent. So we use GFP_NOFAIL to pre-allocate an extent_status and pass it to __es_remove_extent() to avoid this problem. In addition, since the allocated memory is outside the i_es_lock, the extent_status tree may change and the pre-allocated extent_status is no longer needed, so we release the pre-allocated extent_status when es->es_len is not initialized. Suggested-by: Jan Kara Signed-off-by: Baokun Li Reviewed-by: Jan Kara Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230424033846.4732-7-libaokun1@huawei.com Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o Stable-dep-of: 8e387c89e96b ("ext4: make sure allocate pending entry not fail") Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin --- fs/ext4/extents_status.c | 13 +++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents_status.c b/fs/ext4/extents_status.c index 10550d62a6763..4af825eb0cb45 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/extents_status.c +++ b/fs/ext4/extents_status.c @@ -1457,6 +1457,7 @@ int ext4_es_remove_extent(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblk, ext4_lblk_t end; int err = 0; int reserved = 0; + struct extent_status *es = NULL; if (EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb)->s_mount_state & EXT4_FC_REPLAY) return 0; @@ -1471,17 +1472,25 @@ int ext4_es_remove_extent(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblk, end = lblk + len - 1; BUG_ON(end < lblk); +retry: + if (err && !es) + es = __es_alloc_extent(true); /* * ext4_clear_inode() depends on us taking i_es_lock unconditionally * so that we are sure __es_shrink() is done with the inode before it * is reclaimed. */ write_lock(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_es_lock); - err = __es_remove_extent(inode, lblk, end, &reserved, NULL); + err = __es_remove_extent(inode, lblk, end, &reserved, es); + if (es && !es->es_len) + __es_free_extent(es); write_unlock(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_es_lock); + if (err) + goto retry; + ext4_es_print_tree(inode); ext4_da_release_space(inode, reserved); - return err; + return 0; } static int __es_shrink(struct ext4_sb_info *sbi, int nr_to_scan, -- 2.42.0