| Message ID | 1308858866-24124-1-git-send-email-josef@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 03:54:26PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: > A user reported this bug again where we have more bitmaps than we are supposed > to. This is because we failed to load the free space cache, but don't update > the ctl->total_bitmaps counter when we remove entries from the tree. This patch > fixes this problem and we should be good to go again. Thanks, > > Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@redhat.com> > --- > V1->V2: made the patch actually correct > fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c | 6 +++++- > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c b/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c > index 3c1a047..e7987f9 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c > @@ -1843,7 +1843,11 @@ void __btrfs_remove_free_space_cache_locked(struct btrfs_free_space_ctl *ctl) > while ((node = rb_last(&ctl->free_space_offset)) != NULL) { > info = rb_entry(node, struct btrfs_free_space, offset_index); > unlink_free_space(ctl, info); > - kfree(info->bitmap); > + if (info->bitmap) { > + kfree(info->bitmap); > + ctl->total_bitmaps--; > + ctl->op->recalc_thresholds(ctl); > + } this was a result of incorrect merge resolution in 0965537308ac3b267ea16e731bd73870a51c53b8: additions: + while ((node = rb_last(&ctl->free_space_offset)) != NULL) { + info = rb_entry(node, struct btrfs_free_space, offset_index); + unlink_free_space(ctl, info); + kfree(info->bitmap); + kmem_cache_free(btrfs_free_space_cachep, info); + if (need_resched()) { + spin_unlock(&ctl->tree_lock); + cond_resched(); + spin_lock(&ctl->tree_lock); + } + } and removals: - while ((node = rb_last(&block_group->free_space_offset)) != NULL) { - info = rb_entry(node, struct btrfs_free_space, offset_index); - if (!info->bitmap) { - unlink_free_space(block_group, info); - kmem_cache_free(btrfs_free_space_cachep, info); - } else { - free_bitmap(block_group, info); - } - - if (need_resched()) { - spin_unlock(&block_group->tree_lock); - cond_resched(); - spin_lock(&block_group->tree_lock); - } - } see the free_bitmap disappear? Please use this helper in your patch. (And no, I was not keeping this for myself until now, I saw this code recently but did not notice there's a bug, your patch just rang a bell) david > kmem_cache_free(btrfs_free_space_cachep, info); > if (need_resched()) { > spin_unlock(&ctl->tree_lock); > -- > 1.7.2.3 > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@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 majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Excerpts from David Sterba's message of 2011-06-24 11:58:20 -0400: > On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 03:54:26PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: > > A user reported this bug again where we have more bitmaps than we are supposed > > to. This is because we failed to load the free space cache, but don't update > > the ctl->total_bitmaps counter when we remove entries from the tree. This patch > > fixes this problem and we should be good to go again. Thanks, > > > > Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@redhat.com> > > --- > > V1->V2: made the patch actually correct > > fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c | 6 +++++- > > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c b/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c > > index 3c1a047..e7987f9 100644 > > --- a/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c > > +++ b/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c > > @@ -1843,7 +1843,11 @@ void __btrfs_remove_free_space_cache_locked(struct btrfs_free_space_ctl *ctl) > > while ((node = rb_last(&ctl->free_space_offset)) != NULL) { > > info = rb_entry(node, struct btrfs_free_space, offset_index); > > unlink_free_space(ctl, info); > > - kfree(info->bitmap); > > + if (info->bitmap) { > > + kfree(info->bitmap); > > + ctl->total_bitmaps--; > > + ctl->op->recalc_thresholds(ctl); > > + } > > this was a result of incorrect merge resolution in > 0965537308ac3b267ea16e731bd73870a51c53b8: Right, I missed this one up. -chris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c b/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c index 3c1a047..e7987f9 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c @@ -1843,7 +1843,11 @@ void __btrfs_remove_free_space_cache_locked(struct btrfs_free_space_ctl *ctl) while ((node = rb_last(&ctl->free_space_offset)) != NULL) { info = rb_entry(node, struct btrfs_free_space, offset_index); unlink_free_space(ctl, info); - kfree(info->bitmap); + if (info->bitmap) { + kfree(info->bitmap); + ctl->total_bitmaps--; + ctl->op->recalc_thresholds(ctl); + } kmem_cache_free(btrfs_free_space_cachep, info); if (need_resched()) { spin_unlock(&ctl->tree_lock);
A user reported this bug again where we have more bitmaps than we are supposed to. This is because we failed to load the free space cache, but don't update the ctl->total_bitmaps counter when we remove entries from the tree. This patch fixes this problem and we should be good to go again. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@redhat.com> --- V1->V2: made the patch actually correct fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c | 6 +++++- 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)