On 2017/6/1 10:12, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 05/31, Chao Yu wrote: >> Hi Jaegeuk, >> >> On 2017/5/27 7:59, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>> If we got failure from both of create and evict_inode, we can hit this wrong >>> bug_on. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <[email protected]> >>> --- >>> fs/f2fs/inode.c | 2 -- >>> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c >>> index e53c784ab11e..5673b0bd83b5 100644 >>> --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c >>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c >>> @@ -426,8 +426,6 @@ void f2fs_evict_inode(struct inode *inode) >>> alloc_nid_failed(sbi, inode->i_ino); >>> clear_inode_flag(inode, FI_FREE_NID); >>> } >>> - f2fs_bug_on(sbi, err && >>> - !exist_written_data(sbi, inode->i_ino, ORPHAN_INO)); >> >> We expect that we can keep the inode in orphan list in >> handle_failed_inode path when inode page have been persisted, so that if >> there is anything error in evice_inode, we can have another chance to >> release inode resource during next mount. >> >> Here we need to check this case, additionally, if we failed to add the >> inode into orphan list in handle_failed_inode, we must have set >> SBI_NEED_FSCK in cp pack, so we need check the case too. >> >> So we can change the code to: >> >> f2fs_bug_on(err && err != -ENOENT && >> (!exist_written_data(sbi, inode->i_ino, ORPHAN_INO) || >> !is_sbi_flag_set(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK));
Oh, looks like it needs to use '&&' in between exist_written_data and is_sbi_flag_set. Could you fix this? Thanks, > > Yup, I'll try this. ;) > > Thanks, > >> >> How do you think? >> >> Thanks, >> >>> out_clear: >>> fscrypt_put_encryption_info(inode, NULL); >>> clear_inode(inode); >>> > > . > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
