| Message ID | 6d512cf2c8f825592703ee0d45c51f22396e6078.1524146556.git.dsterba@suse.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On 04/20/2018 12:33 AM, David Sterba wrote: > Currently fs_info::balance_running is 0 or 1 and does not use the > semantics of atomics. The pause and cancel check for 0, that can happen > only after __btrfs_balance exits for whatever reason. > > Parallel calls to balance ioctl may enter btrfs_ioctl_balance multiple > times but will block on the balance_mutex that protects the > fs_info::flags bit. > > Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> > --- > fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 6 +++++- > fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 1 - > fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 6 +++--- > fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 18 ++++++++++-------- > 4 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h > index 011cb9a8a967..fda94a264eb7 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h > +++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h > @@ -726,6 +726,11 @@ struct btrfs_delayed_root; > * (device replace, resize, device add/delete, balance) > */ > #define BTRFS_FS_EXCL_OP 16 > +/* > + * Indicate that balance has been set up from the ioctl and is in the main > + * phase. The fs_info::balance_ctl is initialized. > + */ > +#define BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING 17 Change looks good to me as such and its a good idea to drop fs_info::balance_running; However instead of making BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING part of btrfs_fs_info::flags pls make it part of btrfs_balance_control::flags Because: We already have BTRFS_BALANCE_RESUME there. And at fs_info level BTRFS_FS_EXCL_OP tells someone excl is running. And if its a balance (either in running or implicit-paused state) then btrfs_fs_info::balance_ctl is not NULL. Thanks, Anand > > struct btrfs_fs_info { > u8 fsid[BTRFS_FSID_SIZE]; > @@ -991,7 +996,6 @@ struct btrfs_fs_info { > /* restriper state */ > spinlock_t balance_lock; > struct mutex balance_mutex; > - atomic_t balance_running; > atomic_t balance_pause_req; > atomic_t balance_cancel_req; > struct btrfs_balance_control *balance_ctl; > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c > index c0482ecea11f..b62559dfb053 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c > @@ -2168,7 +2168,6 @@ static void btrfs_init_balance(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info) > { > spin_lock_init(&fs_info->balance_lock); > mutex_init(&fs_info->balance_mutex); > - atomic_set(&fs_info->balance_running, 0); > atomic_set(&fs_info->balance_pause_req, 0); > atomic_set(&fs_info->balance_cancel_req, 0); > fs_info->balance_ctl = NULL; > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c > index 7c99f74c200e..3dfd5ab2807b 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c > @@ -4506,7 +4506,7 @@ void update_ioctl_balance_args(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, int lock, > > bargs->flags = bctl->flags; > > - if (atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running)) > + if (test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)) > bargs->state |= BTRFS_BALANCE_STATE_RUNNING; > if (atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_pause_req)) > bargs->state |= BTRFS_BALANCE_STATE_PAUSE_REQ; > @@ -4558,7 +4558,7 @@ static long btrfs_ioctl_balance(struct file *file, void __user *arg) > mutex_lock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); > if (fs_info->balance_ctl) { > /* this is either (2) or (3) */ > - if (!atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running)) { > + if (!test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)) { > mutex_unlock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); > /* > * Lock released to allow other waiters to continue, > @@ -4567,7 +4567,7 @@ static long btrfs_ioctl_balance(struct file *file, void __user *arg) > mutex_lock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); > > if (fs_info->balance_ctl && > - !atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running)) { > + !test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)) { > /* this is (3) */ > need_unlock = false; > goto locked; > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c > index e95cc2f09fdd..a766d2f988c1 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c > @@ -3886,13 +3886,14 @@ int btrfs_balance(struct btrfs_balance_control *bctl, > spin_unlock(&fs_info->balance_lock); > } > > - atomic_inc(&fs_info->balance_running); > + ASSERT(!test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)); > + set_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags); > mutex_unlock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); > > ret = __btrfs_balance(fs_info); > > mutex_lock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); > - atomic_dec(&fs_info->balance_running); > + clear_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags); > > if (bargs) { > memset(bargs, 0, sizeof(*bargs)); > @@ -4031,16 +4032,16 @@ int btrfs_pause_balance(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info) > return -ENOTCONN; > } > > - if (atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running)) { > + if (test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)) { > atomic_inc(&fs_info->balance_pause_req); > mutex_unlock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); > > wait_event(fs_info->balance_wait_q, > - atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running) == 0); > + !test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)); > > mutex_lock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); > /* we are good with balance_ctl ripped off from under us */ > - BUG_ON(atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running)); > + BUG_ON(test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)); > atomic_dec(&fs_info->balance_pause_req); > } else { > ret = -ENOTCONN; > @@ -4066,10 +4067,10 @@ int btrfs_cancel_balance(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info) > * if we are running just wait and return, balance item is > * deleted in btrfs_balance in this case > */ > - if (atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running)) { > + if (test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)) { > mutex_unlock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); > wait_event(fs_info->balance_wait_q, > - atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running) == 0); > + !test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)); > mutex_lock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); > } else { > mutex_unlock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); > @@ -4085,7 +4086,8 @@ int btrfs_cancel_balance(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info) > } > } > > - BUG_ON(fs_info->balance_ctl || atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running)); > + BUG_ON(fs_info->balance_ctl || > + test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)); > atomic_dec(&fs_info->balance_cancel_req); > mutex_unlock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); > return 0; > -- 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
On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 03:52:24PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > > > On 04/20/2018 12:33 AM, David Sterba wrote: > > Currently fs_info::balance_running is 0 or 1 and does not use the > > semantics of atomics. The pause and cancel check for 0, that can happen > > only after __btrfs_balance exits for whatever reason. > > > > Parallel calls to balance ioctl may enter btrfs_ioctl_balance multiple > > times but will block on the balance_mutex that protects the > > fs_info::flags bit. > > > > Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> > > --- > > fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 6 +++++- > > fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 1 - > > fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 6 +++--- > > fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 18 ++++++++++-------- > > 4 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h > > index 011cb9a8a967..fda94a264eb7 100644 > > --- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h > > +++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h > > @@ -726,6 +726,11 @@ struct btrfs_delayed_root; > > * (device replace, resize, device add/delete, balance) > > */ > > #define BTRFS_FS_EXCL_OP 16 > > +/* > > + * Indicate that balance has been set up from the ioctl and is in the main > > + * phase. The fs_info::balance_ctl is initialized. > > + */ > > +#define BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING 17 > > > Change looks good to me as such and its a good idea to drop > fs_info::balance_running; > > However instead of making BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING part of > btrfs_fs_info::flags > pls make it part of > btrfs_balance_control::flags > > Because: > We already have BTRFS_BALANCE_RESUME there. > And at fs_info level BTRFS_FS_EXCL_OP tells someone excl is running. > And if its a balance (either in running or implicit-paused state) > then btrfs_fs_info::balance_ctl is not NULL. This would work fine, if the btrfs_balance_control::flags were not copy of the ioctl structure. There are the filter flags stored there, in addition to BTRFS_BALANCE_RESUME. From that point it's the balance ioctl interface and adding the internal runtime flag does not seem to fit. The status bit could be tracked separatelly in btrfs_balance_control so it does not use the whole filesystem flag namespace, as it's always used under balance mutex. As this is simple change to the patch, I'll do that. -- 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
On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 01:58:11PM +0200, David Sterba wrote: > On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 03:52:24PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > > > > > > On 04/20/2018 12:33 AM, David Sterba wrote: > > > Currently fs_info::balance_running is 0 or 1 and does not use the > > > semantics of atomics. The pause and cancel check for 0, that can happen > > > only after __btrfs_balance exits for whatever reason. > > > > > > Parallel calls to balance ioctl may enter btrfs_ioctl_balance multiple > > > times but will block on the balance_mutex that protects the > > > fs_info::flags bit. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> > > > --- > > > fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 6 +++++- > > > fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 1 - > > > fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 6 +++--- > > > fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 18 ++++++++++-------- > > > 4 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h > > > index 011cb9a8a967..fda94a264eb7 100644 > > > --- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h > > > +++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h > > > @@ -726,6 +726,11 @@ struct btrfs_delayed_root; > > > * (device replace, resize, device add/delete, balance) > > > */ > > > #define BTRFS_FS_EXCL_OP 16 > > > +/* > > > + * Indicate that balance has been set up from the ioctl and is in the main > > > + * phase. The fs_info::balance_ctl is initialized. > > > + */ > > > +#define BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING 17 > > > > > > Change looks good to me as such and its a good idea to drop > > fs_info::balance_running; > > > > However instead of making BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING part of > > btrfs_fs_info::flags > > pls make it part of > > btrfs_balance_control::flags > > > > Because: > > We already have BTRFS_BALANCE_RESUME there. > > And at fs_info level BTRFS_FS_EXCL_OP tells someone excl is running. > > And if its a balance (either in running or implicit-paused state) > > then btrfs_fs_info::balance_ctl is not NULL. > > This would work fine, if the btrfs_balance_control::flags were not copy > of the ioctl structure. There are the filter flags stored there, in > addition to BTRFS_BALANCE_RESUME. > > >From that point it's the balance ioctl interface and adding the internal > runtime flag does not seem to fit. > > The status bit could be tracked separatelly in btrfs_balance_control so > it does not use the whole filesystem flag namespace, as it's always used > under balance mutex. > > As this is simple change to the patch, I'll do that. Ok not that simple, the running status is checked outside of balance_mutex and there's one more assertion that does not expect the balance_ctl to exist: @@ -4031,16 +4032,16 @@ int btrfs_pause_balance(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info) return -ENOTCONN; } - if (atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running)) { + if (test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)) { atomic_inc(&fs_info->balance_pause_req); mutex_unlock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); wait_event(fs_info->balance_wait_q, - atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running) == 0); + !test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)); here it's unlocked mutex_lock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); /* we are good with balance_ctl ripped off from under us */ - BUG_ON(atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running)); + BUG_ON(test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)); and rewriting the code so this could be checked the same way is not a simple fixup as I expected. As there's still the extra balance mutex lock/unlock after the volume mutex removal, I'll have a look how this could be cleaned up further. atomic_dec(&fs_info->balance_pause_req); } else { ret = -ENOTCONN; -- 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
> Ok not that simple, the running status is checked outside of > balance_mutex and there's one more assertion that does not expect the > balance_ctl to exist: > > @@ -4031,16 +4032,16 @@ int btrfs_pause_balance(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info) > return -ENOTCONN; > } > > - if (atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running)) { > + if (test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)) { > atomic_inc(&fs_info->balance_pause_req); > mutex_unlock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); > > wait_event(fs_info->balance_wait_q, > - atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running) == 0); > + !test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)); > > here it's unlocked > > mutex_lock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); > /* we are good with balance_ctl ripped off from under us */ > - BUG_ON(atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running)); > + BUG_ON(test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)); > > and rewriting the code so this could be checked the same way is not a simple > fixup as I expected. > > As there's still the extra balance mutex lock/unlock after the volume > mutex removal, I'll have a look how this could be cleaned up further. > > atomic_dec(&fs_info->balance_pause_req); > } else { > ret = -ENOTCONN; Makes sense. Thanks, Anand -- 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
On 04/20/2018 12:33 AM, David Sterba wrote: > Currently fs_info::balance_running is 0 or 1 and does not use the > semantics of atomics. The pause and cancel check for 0, that can happen > only after __btrfs_balance exits for whatever reason. > > Parallel calls to balance ioctl may enter btrfs_ioctl_balance multiple > times but will block on the balance_mutex that protects the > fs_info::flags bit. > > Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> Though it appears to me that we could optimize the lock and atomic bit usage a little more, however it can be taken for the next round of cleanups. So for now.. Reviewed-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com> Thanks, Anand -- 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
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 10:10:24AM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > > > On 04/20/2018 12:33 AM, David Sterba wrote: > > Currently fs_info::balance_running is 0 or 1 and does not use the > > semantics of atomics. The pause and cancel check for 0, that can happen > > only after __btrfs_balance exits for whatever reason. > > > > Parallel calls to balance ioctl may enter btrfs_ioctl_balance multiple > > times but will block on the balance_mutex that protects the > > fs_info::flags bit. > > > > Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> > > Though it appears to me that we could optimize the lock and atomic bit > usage a little more, however it can be taken for the next round of > cleanups. So for now.. > > Reviewed-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com> Thanks, patches updated. -- 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/ctree.h b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h index 011cb9a8a967..fda94a264eb7 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h +++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h @@ -726,6 +726,11 @@ struct btrfs_delayed_root; * (device replace, resize, device add/delete, balance) */ #define BTRFS_FS_EXCL_OP 16 +/* + * Indicate that balance has been set up from the ioctl and is in the main + * phase. The fs_info::balance_ctl is initialized. + */ +#define BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING 17 struct btrfs_fs_info { u8 fsid[BTRFS_FSID_SIZE]; @@ -991,7 +996,6 @@ struct btrfs_fs_info { /* restriper state */ spinlock_t balance_lock; struct mutex balance_mutex; - atomic_t balance_running; atomic_t balance_pause_req; atomic_t balance_cancel_req; struct btrfs_balance_control *balance_ctl; diff --git a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c index c0482ecea11f..b62559dfb053 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c @@ -2168,7 +2168,6 @@ static void btrfs_init_balance(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info) { spin_lock_init(&fs_info->balance_lock); mutex_init(&fs_info->balance_mutex); - atomic_set(&fs_info->balance_running, 0); atomic_set(&fs_info->balance_pause_req, 0); atomic_set(&fs_info->balance_cancel_req, 0); fs_info->balance_ctl = NULL; diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c index 7c99f74c200e..3dfd5ab2807b 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c @@ -4506,7 +4506,7 @@ void update_ioctl_balance_args(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, int lock, bargs->flags = bctl->flags; - if (atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running)) + if (test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)) bargs->state |= BTRFS_BALANCE_STATE_RUNNING; if (atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_pause_req)) bargs->state |= BTRFS_BALANCE_STATE_PAUSE_REQ; @@ -4558,7 +4558,7 @@ static long btrfs_ioctl_balance(struct file *file, void __user *arg) mutex_lock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); if (fs_info->balance_ctl) { /* this is either (2) or (3) */ - if (!atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running)) { + if (!test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)) { mutex_unlock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); /* * Lock released to allow other waiters to continue, @@ -4567,7 +4567,7 @@ static long btrfs_ioctl_balance(struct file *file, void __user *arg) mutex_lock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); if (fs_info->balance_ctl && - !atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running)) { + !test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)) { /* this is (3) */ need_unlock = false; goto locked; diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c index e95cc2f09fdd..a766d2f988c1 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c @@ -3886,13 +3886,14 @@ int btrfs_balance(struct btrfs_balance_control *bctl, spin_unlock(&fs_info->balance_lock); } - atomic_inc(&fs_info->balance_running); + ASSERT(!test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)); + set_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags); mutex_unlock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); ret = __btrfs_balance(fs_info); mutex_lock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); - atomic_dec(&fs_info->balance_running); + clear_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags); if (bargs) { memset(bargs, 0, sizeof(*bargs)); @@ -4031,16 +4032,16 @@ int btrfs_pause_balance(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info) return -ENOTCONN; } - if (atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running)) { + if (test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)) { atomic_inc(&fs_info->balance_pause_req); mutex_unlock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); wait_event(fs_info->balance_wait_q, - atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running) == 0); + !test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)); mutex_lock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); /* we are good with balance_ctl ripped off from under us */ - BUG_ON(atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running)); + BUG_ON(test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)); atomic_dec(&fs_info->balance_pause_req); } else { ret = -ENOTCONN; @@ -4066,10 +4067,10 @@ int btrfs_cancel_balance(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info) * if we are running just wait and return, balance item is * deleted in btrfs_balance in this case */ - if (atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running)) { + if (test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)) { mutex_unlock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); wait_event(fs_info->balance_wait_q, - atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running) == 0); + !test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)); mutex_lock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); } else { mutex_unlock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); @@ -4085,7 +4086,8 @@ int btrfs_cancel_balance(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info) } } - BUG_ON(fs_info->balance_ctl || atomic_read(&fs_info->balance_running)); + BUG_ON(fs_info->balance_ctl || + test_bit(BTRFS_FS_BALANCE_RUNNING, &fs_info->flags)); atomic_dec(&fs_info->balance_cancel_req); mutex_unlock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); return 0;
Currently fs_info::balance_running is 0 or 1 and does not use the semantics of atomics. The pause and cancel check for 0, that can happen only after __btrfs_balance exits for whatever reason. Parallel calls to balance ioctl may enter btrfs_ioctl_balance multiple times but will block on the balance_mutex that protects the fs_info::flags bit. Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> --- fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 6 +++++- fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 1 - fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 6 +++--- fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 18 ++++++++++-------- 4 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)