On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 07:26:53AM -0600, David Sterba wrote: > On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 12:22:10PM +0900, Tsutomu Itoh wrote: > > btrfs_set_extent_delalloc() has the possibility of returning the error. > > So I add the code in which the return value of btrfs_set_extent_delalloc() > > is checked. > > The caller is cluster_pages_for_defrag, the only error I see returned > via __set_extent_bit is -EEXIST, other errors BUG directly or via > extent_io_tree_panic() . > > If the error happens, then the [page_start,page_end-1] is already set > for delalloc, that's probably a bug and should be caught. > > There are two more unchecked calls to btrfs_set_extent_delalloc: > > inode.c:btrfs_writepage_fixup_worker > > 1729 btrfs_set_extent_delalloc(inode, page_start, page_end, > &cached_state); > 1730 ClearPageChecked(page); > 1731 set_page_dirty(page); > > IIRC from the days full of fixup worker fun, the reason why this is safe > to ignore is because the call chain leading here is exactly due to missing > delalloc bits on the page. > > relocation.c:relocate_file_extent_cluster > > 3034 btrfs_set_extent_delalloc(inode, page_start, page_end, > NULL); > 3035 set_page_dirty(page); > > hmm relocation ... :) > > > Anyway, I'd like to let Josef take another look at your patch. >
Even better, we clear delalloc right before doing the set and we have the pages locked, so theres no way we can get EEXIST here, so I'll just drop this patch. Thanks Dave, Josef -- 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
