@@ -1853,24 +1853,18 @@ bool btrfs_zone_activate(struct btrfs_block_group *block_group)
ret = false;
goto out_unlock;
}
-
- /* Successfully activated all the zones */
- if (i == map->num_stripes - 1)
- block_group->zone_is_active = 1;
-
-
}
+
+ /* Successfully activated all the zones */
+ block_group->zone_is_active = 1;
spin_unlock(&block_group->lock);
- if (block_group->zone_is_active) {
- /* For the active block group list */
- btrfs_get_block_group(block_group);
+ /* For the active block group list */
+ btrfs_get_block_group(block_group);
- spin_lock(&fs_info->zone_active_bgs_lock);
- list_add_tail(&block_group->active_bg_list,
- &fs_info->zone_active_bgs);
- spin_unlock(&fs_info->zone_active_bgs_lock);
- }
+ spin_lock(&fs_info->zone_active_bgs_lock);
+ list_add_tail(&block_group->active_bg_list, &fs_info->zone_active_bgs);
+ spin_unlock(&fs_info->zone_active_bgs_lock);
return true;
btrfs_zone_activate() checks if it activated all the underlying zones in the loop. However, that check never hit on an unlimited activate zone device (max_active_zones == 0). Fortunately, it still works without ENOSPC because btrfs_zone_activate() returns true in the end, even if block_group->zone_is_active == 0. But, it is confusing to have non zone_is_active block group still usable for allocation. Also, we are wasting CPU time to iterate the loop every time btrfs_zone_activate() is called for the BGs. Since error case in the loop is handled by out_unlock, we can just set zone_is_active and do the list stuff after the loop. Fixes: f9a912a3c45f ("btrfs: zoned: make zone activation multi stripe capable") Signed-off-by: Naohiro Aota <naohiro.aota@wdc.com> --- fs/btrfs/zoned.c | 22 ++++++++-------------- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)