| Message ID | 20180810055321.19730-3-anand.jain@oracle.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [1/2] btrfs: assert for num_devices below 0 | expand |
On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 01:53:20PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > In preparation to add helper function to deduce the num_devices with > replace running, use assert instead of bug_on and warn_on. > > Signed-off-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com> Ok for the updated condition as it's going to be used in the new helper. Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 01:53:20PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > In preparation to add helper function to deduce the num_devices with > replace running, use assert instead of bug_on and warn_on. > > Signed-off-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com> > --- > fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c > index b6d9b6a6fba7..0062615a79be 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c > @@ -1877,7 +1877,7 @@ int btrfs_rm_device(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, const char *device_path, > num_devices = fs_devices->num_devices; > btrfs_dev_replace_read_lock(&fs_info->dev_replace); > if (btrfs_dev_replace_is_ongoing(&fs_info->dev_replace)) { > - WARN_ON(num_devices < 1); > + ASSERT(num_devices > 0); > num_devices--; I was about to merge the patch but this gave me another opportunity to look at the code: the assertion should check for > 1. The value 1 of num_devices is sligthly wrong here and would lead to 0 returned from the function.
On 08/15/2018 08:11 PM, David Sterba wrote: > On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 01:53:20PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: >> In preparation to add helper function to deduce the num_devices with >> replace running, use assert instead of bug_on and warn_on. >> >> Signed-off-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com> >> --- >> fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 4 ++-- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c >> index b6d9b6a6fba7..0062615a79be 100644 >> --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c >> +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c >> @@ -1877,7 +1877,7 @@ int btrfs_rm_device(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, const char *device_path, >> num_devices = fs_devices->num_devices; >> btrfs_dev_replace_read_lock(&fs_info->dev_replace); >> if (btrfs_dev_replace_is_ongoing(&fs_info->dev_replace)) { >> - WARN_ON(num_devices < 1); >> + ASSERT(num_devices > 0); >> num_devices--; > > I was about to merge the patch but this gave me another opportunity to > look at the code: the assertion should check for > 1. The value 1 of > num_devices is sligthly wrong here and would lead to 0 returned from the > function. Agree its slightly wrong but I kept it as it is to match with the original code. I mentioned about it in the cover letter. Thanks, Anand
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c index b6d9b6a6fba7..0062615a79be 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c @@ -1877,7 +1877,7 @@ int btrfs_rm_device(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, const char *device_path, num_devices = fs_devices->num_devices; btrfs_dev_replace_read_lock(&fs_info->dev_replace); if (btrfs_dev_replace_is_ongoing(&fs_info->dev_replace)) { - WARN_ON(num_devices < 1); + ASSERT(num_devices > 0); num_devices--; } btrfs_dev_replace_read_unlock(&fs_info->dev_replace); @@ -3752,7 +3752,7 @@ int btrfs_balance(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, num_devices = fs_info->fs_devices->num_devices; btrfs_dev_replace_read_lock(&fs_info->dev_replace); if (btrfs_dev_replace_is_ongoing(&fs_info->dev_replace)) { - BUG_ON(num_devices < 1); + ASSERT(num_devices > 0); num_devices--; } btrfs_dev_replace_read_unlock(&fs_info->dev_replace);
In preparation to add helper function to deduce the num_devices with replace running, use assert instead of bug_on and warn_on. Signed-off-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com> --- fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)