On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 07:40:46PM +0530, Chandan Rajendra wrote:
> On Wednesday 07 Oct 2015 11:25:03 David Sterba wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 10:14:24PM +0530, Chandan Rajendra wrote:
> > > + if (unlikely(root->highest_objectid >= BTRFS_LAST_FREE_OBJECTID)) {
> > > + mutex_unlock(&root->objectid_mutex);
> > > + ret = -ENOSPC;
> >
> > ENOSPC ... I don't think it's right as this could be with a normal
> > enospc during subvolume creation. The problem is that theh inode number
> > space is exhausted, the closest error code I see is EOVERFLOW. As this
> > is an ioctl we can afford to define the meaning of this return value as
> > such (unlike for eg. creat()/open()).
> >
> > > + goto free_root_dev;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + mutex_unlock(&root->objectid_mutex);
> > > +
> > >
> > > return 0;
>
> David, Are you suggesting that we return -EOVERFLOW from within
> btrfs_init_fs_root() and continue returning -ENOSPC in case of error
> (i.e. tree_root->highest_objectid >= BTRFS_LAST_FREE_OBJECTID) from
> open_ctree()?
>
> If yes, btrfs_init_fs_root() gets invoked from open_ctree() via
> btrfs_read_fs_root_no_name() and hence we may end up returning -EOVERFLOW when
> servicing the mount() syscall.
Sorry for not answering that. As you're going to resend it, please
use EOVERFLOW in the btrfs_init_fs_root. We should not hit the overflow
error in the mount path.
--
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
