On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 02:36:17PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
>
>
> On 08/12/2014 02:32 PM, Mark Fasheh wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 02:22:31PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 07/17/2014 03:39 PM, Mark Fasheh wrote:
> >>> During its tree walk, btrfs_drop_snapshot() will skip any shared
> >>> subtrees it encounters. This is incorrect when we have qgroups
> >>> turned on as those subtrees need to have their contents
> >>> accounted. In particular, the case we're concerned with is when
> >>> removing our snapshot root leaves the subtree with only one root
> >>> reference.
> >>>
> >>> In those cases we need to find the last remaining root and add
> >>> each extent in the subtree to the corresponding qgroup exclusive
> >>> counts.
> >>>
> >>> This patch implements the shared subtree walk and a new qgroup
> >>> operation, BTRFS_QGROUP_OPER_SUB_SUBTREE. When an operation of
> >>> this type is encountered during qgroup accounting, we search for
> >>> any root references to that extent and in the case that we find
> >>> only one reference left, we go ahead and do the math on it's
> >>> exclusive counts.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Mark Fasheh <mfas...@suse.de>
> >>> Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <jba...@fb.com>
> >>> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
> >>> index 813537f..1aa4325 100644
> >>> --- a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
> >>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
> >>> @@ -8078,6 +8331,14 @@ int btrfs_drop_snapshot(struct btrfs_root *root,
> >>> }
> >>> root_dropped = true;
> >>> out_end_trans:
> >>> + ret = btrfs_delayed_qgroup_accounting(trans, root->fs_info);
> >> ^^^^^^^^^^^
> >>
> >> CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC noticed that root is already free at this point.
> >> I switched it to tree_root instead ;)
> >
> > Oh nice catch, thanks for pointing it out.
> >
> > Time to go update my suse patches.
>
> Grin, pretty sure it doesn't count as a catch if CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC
> finds it.
Fair enough, on my end I get to add CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC to my testing :)
> But it did make it through the balance test we were crashing
> in before. It's probably faster to hand edit the incremental in for the
> suse patch, but here you go just in case:
Yeah we haven't hit anything internally and like I said we've been running
with it for a while. It's probably hard to hit as I can promise that code
has been executed more than a couple times by now.
The delete-items path is definitely broken so maybe you hit something from
that?
Btw, I should be sending a two-liner fix that can be extracted from the
delete-items patch soon.
--Mark
>
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
> index 763632d..ef0845d 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
> @@ -8314,7 +8314,7 @@ int btrfs_drop_snapshot(struct btrfs_root *root,
> }
> root_dropped = true;
> out_end_trans:
> - ret = btrfs_delayed_qgroup_accounting(trans, root->fs_info);
> + ret = btrfs_delayed_qgroup_accounting(trans, tree_root->fs_info);
> if (ret)
> printk_ratelimited(KERN_ERR "BTRFS: Failure %d "
> "running qgroup updates "
--
Mark Fasheh
--
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
