| Message ID | 51C1C7FB.6080805@oracle.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Hi Jeff, There may be a mistake in the patch. See my comments below. On 2013/6/19 23:02, Jeff Liu wrote: > From: Jie Liu <jeff.liu@oracle.com> > > In ocfs2_relink_block_group(), we roll back all those changes if > notify intent to modify buffers for metadata update failed even > if the relevant buffer has not yet been modified/got dirty at that > point, that are not quite right because of: > > - None buffer has been modified/dirty if failed to call > ocfs2_journal_access_gd() against the previous block group buffer > - Only the previous block group buffer has got dirty if failed to > call ocfs2_journal_access_gd() against the block group buffer > - There is no need to roll back the change for file entry buffer at all > > Those problems will not cause anything wrong but unnecessary. > This patch fix them and kill the useless bg_ptr variable as well. > > Signed-off-by: Jie Liu <jeff.liu@oracle.com> > --- > fs/ocfs2/suballoc.c | 25 ++++++++++++------------- > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/suballoc.c b/fs/ocfs2/suballoc.c > index b7e74b5..101d16d 100644 > --- a/fs/ocfs2/suballoc.c > +++ b/fs/ocfs2/suballoc.c > @@ -1422,7 +1422,7 @@ static int ocfs2_relink_block_group(handle_t *handle, > int status; > /* there is a really tiny chance the journal calls could fail, > * but we wouldn't want inconsistent blocks in *any* case. */ > - u64 fe_ptr, bg_ptr, prev_bg_ptr; Why remove bg_ptr and prev_bg_ptr from the context? bg_ptr and prev_bg_ptr are also usable. > struct ocfs2_group_desc *prev_bg = (struct ocfs2_group_desc *) prev_bg_bh->b_data; > @@ -1437,7 +1437,6 @@ static int ocfs2_relink_block_group(handle_t *handle, > (unsigned long long)le64_to_cpu(bg->bg_blkno), > (unsigned long long)le64_to_cpu(prev_bg->bg_blkno)); > > - fe_ptr = le64_to_cpu(fe->id2.i_chain.cl_recs[chain].c_blkno); > bg_ptr = le64_to_cpu(bg->bg_next_group); > prev_bg_ptr = le64_to_cpu(prev_bg->bg_next_group); > > @@ -1446,7 +1445,7 @@ static int ocfs2_relink_block_group(handle_t *handle, > OCFS2_JOURNAL_ACCESS_WRITE); > if (status < 0) { > mlog_errno(status); > - goto out_rollback; > + goto out; > } > > prev_bg->bg_next_group = bg->bg_next_group; > @@ -1456,7 +1455,7 @@ static int ocfs2_relink_block_group(handle_t *handle, > bg_bh, OCFS2_JOURNAL_ACCESS_WRITE); > if (status < 0) { > mlog_errno(status); > - goto out_rollback; > + goto out_rollback_prev_bg; > } > > bg->bg_next_group = fe->id2.i_chain.cl_recs[chain].c_blkno; > @@ -1466,21 +1465,21 @@ static int ocfs2_relink_block_group(handle_t *handle, > fe_bh, OCFS2_JOURNAL_ACCESS_WRITE); > if (status < 0) { > mlog_errno(status); > - goto out_rollback; > + goto out_rollback_bg; > } > > fe->id2.i_chain.cl_recs[chain].c_blkno = bg->bg_blkno; > ocfs2_journal_dirty(handle, fe_bh); > > -out_rollback: > - if (status < 0) { > - fe->id2.i_chain.cl_recs[chain].c_blkno = cpu_to_le64(fe_ptr); > - bg->bg_next_group = cpu_to_le64(bg_ptr); > - prev_bg->bg_next_group = cpu_to_le64(prev_bg_ptr); > - } > +out: > + return status; > > - if (status) > - mlog_errno(status); > +out_rollback_bg: > + bg->bg_next_group = cpu_to_le64(bg_ptr); > +out_rollback_prev_bg: > + prev_bg->bg_next_group = cpu_to_le64(prev_bg_ptr); > + > + mlog_errno(status); > return status; > } > >
On 06/20/2013 01:13 PM, Younger Liu wrote: > Hi Jeff, > There may be a mistake in the patch. See my comments below. > > On 2013/6/19 23:02, Jeff Liu wrote: >> From: Jie Liu <jeff.liu@oracle.com> >> >> In ocfs2_relink_block_group(), we roll back all those changes if >> notify intent to modify buffers for metadata update failed even >> if the relevant buffer has not yet been modified/got dirty at that >> point, that are not quite right because of: >> >> - None buffer has been modified/dirty if failed to call >> ocfs2_journal_access_gd() against the previous block group buffer >> - Only the previous block group buffer has got dirty if failed to >> call ocfs2_journal_access_gd() against the block group buffer >> - There is no need to roll back the change for file entry buffer at all >> >> Those problems will not cause anything wrong but unnecessary. >> This patch fix them and kill the useless bg_ptr variable as well. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jie Liu <jeff.liu@oracle.com> >> --- >> fs/ocfs2/suballoc.c | 25 ++++++++++++------------- >> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/suballoc.c b/fs/ocfs2/suballoc.c >> index b7e74b5..101d16d 100644 >> --- a/fs/ocfs2/suballoc.c >> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/suballoc.c >> @@ -1422,7 +1422,7 @@ static int ocfs2_relink_block_group(handle_t *handle, >> int status; >> /* there is a really tiny chance the journal calls could fail, >> * but we wouldn't want inconsistent blocks in *any* case. */ >> - u64 fe_ptr, bg_ptr, prev_bg_ptr; > > Why remove bg_ptr and prev_bg_ptr from the context? > bg_ptr and prev_bg_ptr are also usable. Strange! I'm not sure why that happened. Actually, it looks like blow on my box. - u64 fe_ptr, bg_ptr, prev_bg_ptr; + u64 bg_ptr, prev_bg_ptr; Anyway I'll resend it a little while. Thanks, -Jeff > >> struct ocfs2_group_desc *prev_bg = (struct ocfs2_group_desc *) prev_bg_bh->b_data; >> @@ -1437,7 +1437,6 @@ static int ocfs2_relink_block_group(handle_t *handle, >> (unsigned long long)le64_to_cpu(bg->bg_blkno), >> (unsigned long long)le64_to_cpu(prev_bg->bg_blkno)); >> >> - fe_ptr = le64_to_cpu(fe->id2.i_chain.cl_recs[chain].c_blkno); >> bg_ptr = le64_to_cpu(bg->bg_next_group); >> prev_bg_ptr = le64_to_cpu(prev_bg->bg_next_group); >> >> @@ -1446,7 +1445,7 @@ static int ocfs2_relink_block_group(handle_t *handle, >> OCFS2_JOURNAL_ACCESS_WRITE); >> if (status < 0) { >> mlog_errno(status); >> - goto out_rollback; >> + goto out; >> } >> >> prev_bg->bg_next_group = bg->bg_next_group; >> @@ -1456,7 +1455,7 @@ static int ocfs2_relink_block_group(handle_t *handle, >> bg_bh, OCFS2_JOURNAL_ACCESS_WRITE); >> if (status < 0) { >> mlog_errno(status); >> - goto out_rollback; >> + goto out_rollback_prev_bg; >> } >> >> bg->bg_next_group = fe->id2.i_chain.cl_recs[chain].c_blkno; >> @@ -1466,21 +1465,21 @@ static int ocfs2_relink_block_group(handle_t *handle, >> fe_bh, OCFS2_JOURNAL_ACCESS_WRITE); >> if (status < 0) { >> mlog_errno(status); >> - goto out_rollback; >> + goto out_rollback_bg; >> } >> >> fe->id2.i_chain.cl_recs[chain].c_blkno = bg->bg_blkno; >> ocfs2_journal_dirty(handle, fe_bh); >> >> -out_rollback: >> - if (status < 0) { >> - fe->id2.i_chain.cl_recs[chain].c_blkno = cpu_to_le64(fe_ptr); >> - bg->bg_next_group = cpu_to_le64(bg_ptr); >> - prev_bg->bg_next_group = cpu_to_le64(prev_bg_ptr); >> - } >> +out: >> + return status; >> >> - if (status) >> - mlog_errno(status); >> +out_rollback_bg: >> + bg->bg_next_group = cpu_to_le64(bg_ptr); >> +out_rollback_prev_bg: >> + prev_bg->bg_next_group = cpu_to_le64(prev_bg_ptr); >> + >> + mlog_errno(status); >> return status; >> } >> >> >
diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/suballoc.c b/fs/ocfs2/suballoc.c index b7e74b5..101d16d 100644 --- a/fs/ocfs2/suballoc.c +++ b/fs/ocfs2/suballoc.c @@ -1422,7 +1422,7 @@ static int ocfs2_relink_block_group(handle_t *handle, int status; /* there is a really tiny chance the journal calls could fail, * but we wouldn't want inconsistent blocks in *any* case. */ - u64 fe_ptr, bg_ptr, prev_bg_ptr; struct ocfs2_group_desc *prev_bg = (struct ocfs2_group_desc *) prev_bg_bh->b_data; @@ -1437,7 +1437,6 @@ static int ocfs2_relink_block_group(handle_t *handle, (unsigned long long)le64_to_cpu(bg->bg_blkno), (unsigned long long)le64_to_cpu(prev_bg->bg_blkno));