On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 03:25:23PM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
> This can fail for any number of reasons, why bring the whole box down
> with it?
I've written something more relevant for the code change.
> Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo <w...@suse.com>
> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jo...@toxicpanda.com>
> ---
> fs/btrfs/relocation.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/relocation.c b/fs/btrfs/relocation.c
> index 592b2d156626..6e8d89e4733a 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/relocation.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/relocation.c
> @@ -1322,7 +1322,8 @@ int replace_path(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
> struct reloc_control *rc,
> path->lowest_level = level;
> ret = btrfs_search_slot(trans, src, &key, path, 0, 1);
> path->lowest_level = 0;
> - BUG_ON(ret);
> + if (ret)
> + break;
As replace_path returns positive values, ie. the level, search failing
to find the key could return 1 which would be wrongly interpreted if
returned as-is. The usual pattern is to switch that to -ENOENT, like
--- a/fs/btrfs/relocation.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/relocation.c
@@ -1323,8 +1323,11 @@ int replace_path(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
struct reloc_control *rc,
path->lowest_level = level;
ret = btrfs_search_slot(trans, src, &key, path, 0, 1);
path->lowest_level = 0;
- if (ret < 0)
+ if (ret) {
+ if (ret > 0)
+ ret = -ENOENT;
break;
+ }
/*
* Info qgroup to trace both subtrees.
---
