On Sun, Dec 06, 2015 at 12:32:31PM +0200, Alex Lyakas wrote:
> do_chunk_alloc returns 1 when it succeeds to allocate a new chunk.
> But flush_space will not convert this to 0, and will also return 1.
> As a result, reserve_metadata_bytes will think that flush_space failed,
> and may potentially return this value "1" to the caller (depends how
> reserve_metadata_bytes was called). The caller will also treat this as an
> error.
> For example, btrfs_block_rsv_refill does:
>
> int ret = -ENOSPC;
> ...
> ret = reserve_metadata_bytes(root, block_rsv, num_bytes, flush);
> if (!ret) {
> block_rsv_add_bytes(block_rsv, num_bytes, 0);
> return 0;
> }
>
> return ret;
>
> So it will return -ENOSPC.
Reviewed-by: Liu Bo <bo.li....@oracle.com>
Thanks,
-liubo
>
> Signed-off-by: Alex Lyakas <a...@zadarastorage.com>
> Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <jba...@fb.com>
>
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
> index 4b89680..1ba3f0d 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
> @@ -4727,7 +4727,7 @@ static int flush_space(struct btrfs_root *root,
> btrfs_get_alloc_profile(root, 0),
> CHUNK_ALLOC_NO_FORCE);
> btrfs_end_transaction(trans, root);
> - if (ret == -ENOSPC)
> + if (ret > 0 || ret == -ENOSPC)
> ret = 0;
> break;
> case COMMIT_TRANS:
>
> On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 12:19 PM, Alex Lyakas <a...@zadarastorage.com> wrote:
> > Hi Liu,
> > I was studying on how block reservation works, and making some
> > modifications in reserve_metadata_bytes to understand better what it
> > does. Then suddenly I saw this problem. I guess it depends on which
> > value of "flush" parameter is passed to reserve_metadata_bytes.
> >
> > Alex.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 8:14 PM, Liu Bo <bo.li....@oracle.com> wrote:
> >> On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 06:51:03PM +0200, Alex Lyakas wrote:
> >>> do_chunk_alloc returns 1 when it succeeds to allocate a new chunk.
> >>> But flush_space will not convert this to 0, and will also return 1.
> >>> As a result, reserve_metadata_bytes will think that flush_space failed,
> >>> and may potentially return this value "1" to the caller (depends how
> >>> reserve_metadata_bytes was called). The caller will also treat this as an
> >>> error.
> >>> For example, btrfs_block_rsv_refill does:
> >>>
> >>> int ret = -ENOSPC;
> >>> ...
> >>> ret = reserve_metadata_bytes(root, block_rsv, num_bytes, flush);
> >>> if (!ret) {
> >>> block_rsv_add_bytes(block_rsv, num_bytes, 0);
> >>> return 0;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> return ret;
> >>>
> >>> So it will return -ENOSPC.
> >>
> >> It will return 1 instead of -ENOSPC.
> >>
> >> The patch looks good, I noticed this before, but I didn't manage to
> >> trigger a error for this, did you catch a error like that?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> -liubo
> >>
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
> >>> index 4b89680..1ba3f0d 100644
> >>> --- a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
> >>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
> >>> @@ -4727,7 +4727,7 @@ static int flush_space(struct btrfs_root *root,
> >>> btrfs_get_alloc_profile(root, 0),
> >>> CHUNK_ALLOC_NO_FORCE);
> >>> btrfs_end_transaction(trans, root);
> >>> - if (ret == -ENOSPC)
> >>> + if (ret > 0 || ret == -ENOSPC)
> >>> ret = 0;
> >>> break;
> >>> case COMMIT_TRANS:
> >>> --
> >>> 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
--
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
