- 25 1月, 2013 5 次提交
-
-
由 Miao Xie 提交于
We may access and update transaction->aborted on the different CPUs without lock, so we need ACCESS_ONCE() wrapper to prevent the compiler from creating unsolicited accesses and make sure we can get the right value. Signed-off-by: NMiao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
-
由 Josef Bacik 提交于
I noticed a WARN_ON going off when adding csums because we were going over the amount of csum bytes that should have been allowed for an ordered extent. This is a leftover from when we used to hold the csums privately for direct io, but now we use the normal ordered sum stuff so we need to make sure and check if we've moved on to another extent so that the csums are added to the right extent. Without this we could end up with csums for bytenrs that don't have extents to cover them yet. Thanks, Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
-
由 Liu Bo 提交于
For compressed extents, the range of checksum is covered by disk length, and the disk length is different with ram length, so we need to use disk length instead to get us the right checksum. Signed-off-by: NLiu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
-
由 Josef Bacik 提交于
A user reported a BUG_ON(ret) that occured during tree log replay. Ret was -EAGAIN, so what I think happened is that we removed an extent that covered a bitmap entry and an extent entry. We remove the part from the bitmap and return -EAGAIN and then search for the next piece we want to remove, which happens to be an entire extent entry, so we just free the sucker and return. The problem is ret is still set to -EAGAIN so we trip the BUG_ON(). The user used btrfs-zero-log so I'm not 100% sure this is what happened so I've added a WARN_ON() to catch the other possibility. Thanks, Reported-by: NJan Steffens <jan.steffens@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
-
由 Josef Bacik 提交于
We drop the extent map tree lock while we're logging extents, so somebody could come in and merge another extent into this one and screw up our logging, or they could even remove us from the list which would keep us from logging the extent or freeing our ref on it, so we need to make sure to not clear LOGGING until after the extent is logged, and then we can merge it to adjacent extents. Thanks, Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
-
- 22 1月, 2013 5 次提交
-
-
由 Ilya Dryomov 提交于
Commit 3fed40cc ("Btrfs: cleanup duplicated division functions"), which was merged into 3.8-rc1, has introduced a regression by removing logic that was guarding us against bad user input. Bring it back. Signed-off-by: NIlya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: NChris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
-
-
由 Chris Mason 提交于
Merge branch 'for-chris' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/josef/btrfs-next into linus
-
由 Arne Jansen 提交于
Currently you can just destroy a qgroup even though it is in use by other qgroups or has qgroups assigned to it. This patch prevents destruction of qgroups unless they are completely unused. Otherwise destroy will return EBUSY. Reported-by: NEric Hopper <hopper@omnifarious.org> Signed-off-by: NArne Jansen <sensille@gmx.net> Signed-off-by: NChris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
-
由 Arne Jansen 提交于
If a qgroup that has still assignments is deleted by the user, the corresponding relations are left in the tree. This leads to an unmountable filesystem. With this patch, those relations are simple ignored. Reported-by: NEric Hopper <hopper@omnifarious.org> Signed-off-by: NArne Jansen <sensille@gmx.net> Signed-off-by: NChris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
-
- 20 1月, 2013 5 次提交
-
-
由 Ilya Dryomov 提交于
Operation-specific check (whether subvol is readonly or not) should go after the mutual exclusiveness check. Signed-off-by: NIlya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>
-
由 Ilya Dryomov 提交于
Fix unlock order in btrfs_ioctl_rm_dev(). Signed-off-by: NIlya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>
-
由 Ilya Dryomov 提交于
Fix unlock order in btrfs_ioctl_resize(). Signed-off-by: NIlya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>
-
由 Ilya Dryomov 提交于
The error code that is returned in response to starting a mutually exclusive operation when there is one already running got silently changed from EINVAL to EINPROGRESS by 5ac00add. Returning EINPROGRESS to, say, add_dev, when rm_dev is running is misleading. Furthermore, the operation itself may want to use EINPROGRESS for other purposes. Signed-off-by: NIlya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>
-
由 Ilya Dryomov 提交于
Balance pause/resume logic got broken by 5ac00add (went in into 3.8-rc1 as part of dev-replace merge). Offending commit took a stab at making mutually exclusive volume operations (add_dev, rm_dev, resize, balance, replace_dev) not block behind volume_mutex if another such operation is in progress and instead return an error right away. Balancing front-end relied on the blocking behaviour, so the fix is ugly, but short of a complete rework, it's the best we can do. Reported-by: NLiu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: NIlya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>
-
- 15 1月, 2013 14 次提交
-
-
由 Eric Sandeen 提交于
truncate() vs. ftruncate() differ in the VFS; truncate() doesn't set (ATTR_CTIME | ATTR_MTIME), and it's up to the fs to do the timestamp updates if the size changes. Signed-off-by: NEric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
-
由 Zach Brown 提交于
btrfs_cont_expand() tries to free an IS_ERR em as it gets an error from btrfs_get_extent() and breaks out of its loop. An instance of -EEXIST was reported in the wild: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874407 I have no idea if that -EEXIST is surprising, or not. Regardless, this error handling should be cleaned up to handle other reasonable errors (ENOMEM, EIO; whatever). This seemed to be the only buggy freeing of the relatively rare IS_ERR em so I opted to fix the caller rather than teach free_extent_map() to use IS_ERR_OR_NULL(). Signed-off-by: NZach Brown <zab@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: NEric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
-
由 Liu Bo 提交于
xfstests case 285 complains. It it because btrfs did not try to find unwritten delalloc bytes(only dirty pages, not yet writeback) behind prealloc extents, it ends up finding nothing while we're with SEEK_DATA. Signed-off-by: NLiu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
-
由 Liu Bo 提交于
Lock end is inclusive. Signed-off-by: NLiu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
-
由 Liu Bo 提交于
We forgot to reset the path lock state to zero after we unlock the path block, and this can lead to the ASSERT checker in tree unlock API. Reported-by: NSlava Barinov <rayslava@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: NLiu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
-
由 Liu Bo 提交于
This'd avoid us empty looping. Say we have only one disk and the metadata raid type will be defaultly DUP, and we do not need to start from index=0(RAID10) and get over two empty loops to index=2(DUP). Signed-off-by: NLiu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
-
由 Josef Bacik 提交于
Running xfstests 83 in a loop would sometimes fail the fsck. This happens because if we invalidate a page that already has an ordered extent setup for it we will complete the ordered extent ourselves, assuming that the truncate will clean everything up. The problem with this is there is plenty of time for the truncate to fail after we've done this work. So to fix this we need to add the orphan item first to make sure the cleanup gets done properly, and then we can truncate the pagecache and all that stuff and be safe. This fixes the btrfsck failures I was seeing while running 83 in a loop. Thanks, Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
-
由 Josef Bacik 提交于
We still need to say we're flushing if we're limit flushing to keep somebody from coming in and stealing our reservation. Thanks, Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
-
由 Miao Xie 提交于
We forget to give up the write access after we find some device operation is going on. Fix it. Signed-off-by: NMiao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
-
由 Miao Xie 提交于
We should not resize a readonly device, fix it. Signed-off-by: NMiao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
-
由 Miao Xie 提交于
Step to reproduce: # mkfs.btrfs <disk> # mount <disk> <mnt> # btrfs sub create <mnt>/subv0 # btrfs sub snap <mnt> <mnt>/subv0/snap0 # change <mnt>/subv0 from R/W to R/O # btrfs sub del <mnt>/subv0/snap0 We deleted the snapshot successfully. I think we should not be able to delete the snapshot since the parent subvolume is R/O. Signed-off-by: NMiao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
-
由 Miao Xie 提交于
Qgroup id 0 is a special number, we should set the id of a qgroup to 0. Fix it. Signed-off-by: NMiao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
-
由 Lukas Czerner 提交于
When we're deleting the device we should get it in write mode since we're going to re-write the super block magic on that device. And it should fail if the device is read-only. Signed-off-by: NLukas Czerner <lczerner@redhat.com>
-
由 Tsutomu Itoh 提交于
We should free name_cache_entry before returning from the error handling code. Signed-off-by: NTsutomu Itoh <t-itoh@jp.fujitsu.com>
-
- 19 12月, 2012 2 次提交
-
-
由 Chris Mason 提交于
This reverts commit 6a7a665d. This was bug was fixed differently in 3.6, so this commit isn't needed. Conflicts: fs/btrfs/ctree.c Signed-off-by: NChris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
-
由 Chris Mason 提交于
This reverts commit 95c80bb1. The bug addressed by this commit was fixed differently back in 3.6 Signed-off-by: NChris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
-
- 18 12月, 2012 2 次提交
-
-
由 Liu Bo 提交于
Users report a bug, the reproducer is: $ mkfs.btrfs /dev/loop0 $ mount /dev/loop0 /mnt/btrfs/ $ mkdir /mnt/btrfs/dir $ chattr +C /mnt/btrfs/dir/ $ dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/btrfs/dir/foo bs=4K count=10; $ lsattr /mnt/btrfs/dir/foo ---------------C- /mnt/btrfs/dir/foo $ filefrag /mnt/btrfs/dir/foo /mnt/btrfs/dir/foo: 1 extent found ---> an extent $ dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/btrfs/dir/foo bs=4K count=1 seek=5 conv=notrunc,nocreat; sync $ filefrag /mnt/btrfs/dir/foo /mnt/btrfs/dir/foo: 3 extents found ---> with nocow, btrfs breaks the extent into three parts The new created file should not only inherit the NODATACOW flag, but also honor NODATASUM flag, because we must do COW on a file extent with checksum. Signed-off-by: NLiu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: NChris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
-
由 Chris Mason 提交于
The handling for directory crc hash overflows was fairly obscure, split_leaf returns EOVERFLOW when we try to extend the item and that is supposed to bubble up to userland. For a while it did so, but along the way we added better handling of errors and forced the FS readonly if we hit IO errors during the directory insertion. Along the way, we started testing only for EEXIST and the EOVERFLOW case was dropped. The end result is that we may force the FS readonly if we catch a directory hash bucket overflow. This fixes a few problem spots. First I add tests for EOVERFLOW in the places where we can safely just return the error up the chain. btrfs_rename is harder though, because it tries to insert the new directory item only after it has already unlinked anything the rename was going to overwrite. Rather than adding very complex logic, I added a helper to test for the hash overflow case early while it is still safe to bail out. Snapshot and subvolume creation had a similar problem, so they are using the new helper now too. Signed-off-by: NChris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com> Reported-by: NPascal Junod <pascal@junod.info>
-
- 17 12月, 2012 7 次提交
-
-
由 Josef Bacik 提交于
This confuses and angers lockdep even though it's ok. We don't really need the lock for free space inodes since only the transaction committer will be reserving space. Thanks, Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: NChris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
-
由 Josef Bacik 提交于
This happens because writeback_inodes_sb_nr_if_idle does down_read. This doesn't work for us and it has not been fixed upstream yet, so do it ourselves and use that instead so we can stop having this stupid long standing lockup. Thanks, Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: NChris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
-
由 Filipe Brandenburger 提交于
When a new file is created with btrfs_create(), the inode will initially be created with permissions 0666 and later on in btrfs_init_acl() it will be adapted to mask out the umask bits. The problem is that this change won't make it into the btrfs_inode unless there's another change to the inode (e.g. writing content changing the size or touching the file changing the mtime.) This fix adds a call to btrfs_update_inode() to btrfs_create() to make sure that the change will not get lost if the in-memory inode is flushed before other changes are made to the file. Signed-off-by: NFilipe Brandenburger <filbranden@google.com> Reviewed-by: NLiu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: NChris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
-
由 Liu Bo 提交于
Raid properties can be shared among raid calculation code, we can put them into a global table to keep it simple. Signed-off-by: NLiu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: NChris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
-
由 Stefan Behrens 提交于
This fixes a very special case that can be reproduced by just disconnecting a disk at runtime, and without unmounting the filesystem first, start scrub on the filesystem with the disconnected disk. All read and write EIOs are handled correctly, only the first superblock is an exception and gives a BUG() in a subfunction. The BUG() is correct, it would crash later otherwise. The subfunction must not be called for superblocks and this is what the fix changes. Reported-by: NJoeri Vanthienen <mail@joerivanthienen.be> Signed-off-by: NStefan Behrens <sbehrens@giantdisaster.de> Signed-off-by: NChris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
-
由 Josef Bacik 提交于
This starts a transaction and dirties the inode everytime we call it, which is super expensive if you have a write heavy workload. We will be updating the inode when the IO completes and we reserve the space for the inode update when we reserve space for the write, so there is no chance of loss of information or enospc issues. Thanks, Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: NChris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
-
由 Josef Bacik 提交于
I noticed while doing fsync tests that we were always dropping the path and re-searching when we first cow the log root even though we've already gotten the write lock on the root. That's because we don't take into account that there might not be a parent node, so fix the check to make sure there is actually a parent node before we undo all of this work for nothing. Thanks, Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: NChris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
-