Excerpts from Tsutomu Itoh's message of 2011-01-21 01:06:29 -0500:
> (2011/01/21 8:47), Tsutomu Itoh wrote:
> > (2011/01/21 1:09), Josef Bacik wrote:
> >> I'd rather we go through and have these things return an error than do a
> >> BUG_ON(). We're moving towards a more stable BTRFS, not one that panics
> >> more
> >> often :).
> >
> > Yes, I also think so.
> > This patch is my first step.
> >
> > My modification policy is as follows:
> >
> > 1. short term
> > - To more stable BTRFS, the part that should be corrected is clarified.
> > - The panic is not done by the NULL pointer reference etc.
> This means, even if temporary increase BUG_ON()...
>
> In addition, I think that an important memory allocation should retry several
> times.
> So, I propose the following patches as this sample.
>
> >
> > 2. long term
> > - BUG_ON() is decreased by using the forced-readonly framework(already
> > posted by Liu Bo),
> > etc.
>
>
> This patch retries kmem_cache_alloc() in start_transaction() several times.
Thanks for working on these, it's really good to see these error checks
going on.
We don't want to loop on kmem_cache_alloc(), for allocations less than
4KB, the allocator only returns NULL if the box has gone into OOM
anyway. By the time we get these, things have gone horribly wrong.
If we really can't fail, we can use GFP_NOFAIL, which loops for us.
-chris
>
> Signed-off-by: Tsutomu Itoh <t-i...@jp.fujitsu.com>
> ---
> fs/btrfs/transaction.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff -urNp linux-2.6.38-rc1/fs/btrfs/transaction.c
> linux-2.6.38-rc1.new/fs/btrfs/transaction.c
> --- linux-2.6.38-rc1/fs/btrfs/transaction.c 2011-01-19 08:14:02.000000000
> +0900
> +++ linux-2.6.38-rc1.new/fs/btrfs/transaction.c 2011-01-21
> 14:08:02.000000000 +0900
> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
> #include <linux/writeback.h>
> #include <linux/pagemap.h>
> #include <linux/blkdev.h>
> +#include <linux/ratelimit.h>
> #include "ctree.h"
> #include "disk-io.h"
> #include "transaction.h"
> @@ -175,6 +176,25 @@ static int may_wait_transaction(struct b
> return 0;
> }
>
> +#define MAX_ITERATIONS 10
> +
> +static struct btrfs_trans_handle *alloc_trans_handle(void)
> +{
> + struct btrfs_trans_handle *ret;
> + int i = 0;
> +
> + ret = kmem_cache_alloc(btrfs_trans_handle_cachep, GFP_NOFS);
> + if (!ret) {
> + pr_notice_ratelimited("ENOMEM in %s, retrying.\n", __func__);
> + do {
> + yield();
> + ret = kmem_cache_alloc(btrfs_trans_handle_cachep,
> + GFP_NOFS);
> + } while (!ret && i++ < MAX_ITERATIONS);
> + }
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> static struct btrfs_trans_handle *start_transaction(struct btrfs_root *root,
> u64 num_items, int type)
> {
> @@ -185,7 +205,7 @@ static struct btrfs_trans_handle *start_
> if (root->fs_info->fs_state & BTRFS_SUPER_FLAG_ERROR)
> return ERR_PTR(-EROFS);
> again:
> - h = kmem_cache_alloc(btrfs_trans_handle_cachep, GFP_NOFS);
> + h = alloc_trans_handle();
> if (!h)
> return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
