kernel.git/fs/btrfs/inode.c, branch linux-4.0.y

Merge branch 'for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs

2015-03-21T17:53:37Z

Pull btrfs fixes from Chris Mason: "Most of these are fixing extent reservation accounting, or corners with tree writeback during commit. Josef's set does add a test, which isn't strictly a fix, but it'll keep us from making this same mistake again" * 'for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs: Btrfs: fix outstanding_extents accounting in DIO Btrfs: add sanity test for outstanding_extents accounting Btrfs: just free dummy extent buffers Btrfs: account merges/splits properly Btrfs: prepare block group cache before writing Btrfs: fix ASSERT(list_empty(&cur_trans->dirty_bgs_list) Btrfs: account for the correct number of extents for delalloc reservations Btrfs: fix merge delalloc logic Btrfs: fix comp_oper to get right order Btrfs: catch transaction abortion after waiting for it btrfs: fix sizeof format specifier in btrfs_check_super_valid()

Btrfs: fix outstanding_extents accounting in DIO

2015-03-17T20:36:35Z

We are keeping track of how many extents we need to reserve properly based on the amount we want to write, but we were still incrementing outstanding_extents if we wrote less than what we requested. This isn't quite right since we will be limited to our max extent size. So instead lets do something horrible! Keep track of how many outstanding_extents we reserved, and decrement each time we allocate an extent. If we use our entire reserve make sure to jack up outstanding_extents on the inode so the accounting works out properly. Thanks, Reported-by: Filipe Manana Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik

Btrfs: add sanity test for outstanding_extents accounting

2015-03-17T20:36:31Z

I introduced a regression wrt outstanding_extents accounting. These are tricky areas that aren't easily covered by xfstests as we could change MAX_EXTENT_SIZE at any time. So add sanity tests to cover the various conditions that are tricky in order to make sure we don't introduce regressions in the future. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik

Btrfs: account merges/splits properly

2015-03-17T20:28:21Z

My fix Btrfs: fix merge delalloc logic only fixed half of the problems, it didn't fix the case where we have two large extents on either side and then join them together with a new small extent. We need to instead keep track of how many extents we have accounted for with each side of the new extent, and then see how many extents we need for the new large extent. If they match then we know we need to keep our reservation, otherwise we need to drop our reservation. This shows up with a case like this [BTRFS_MAX_EXTENT_SIZE+4K][4K HOLE][BTRFS_MAX_EXTENT_SIZE+4K] Previously the logic would have said that the number extents required for the new size (3) is larger than the number of extents required for the largest side (2) therefore we need to keep our reservation. But this isn't the case, since both sides require a reservation of 2 which leads to 4 for the whole range currently reserved, but we only need 3, so we need to drop one of the reservations. The same problem existed for splits, we'd think we only need 3 extents when creating the hole but in reality we need 4. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik

Btrfs: fix merge delalloc logic

2015-03-13T20:46:59Z

My patch to properly count outstanding extents wrt MAX_EXTENT_SIZE introduced a regression when re-dirtying already dirty areas. We have logic in split to make sure we are taking the largest space into account but didn't have it for merge, so it was sometimes making us think we were turning a tiny extent into a huge extent, when in reality we already had a huge extent and needed to use the other side in our logic. This fixes the regression that was reported by a user on list. Thanks, Reported-by: Markus Trippelsdorf Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik Signed-off-by: Chris Mason

Merge branch 'for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs

2015-03-06T21:52:54Z

Pull btrfs fixes from Chris Mason: "Outside of misc fixes, Filipe has a few fsync corners and we're pulling in one more of Josef's fixes from production use here" * 'for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs: Btrfs:__add_inode_ref: out of bounds memory read when looking for extended ref. Btrfs: fix data loss in the fast fsync path Btrfs: remove extra run_delayed_refs in update_cowonly_root Btrfs: incremental send, don't rename a directory too soon btrfs: fix lost return value due to variable shadowing Btrfs: do not ignore errors from btrfs_lookup_xattr in do_setxattr Btrfs: fix off-by-one logic error in btrfs_realloc_node Btrfs: add missing inode update when punching hole Btrfs: abort the transaction if we fail to update the free space cache inode Btrfs: fix fsync race leading to ordered extent memory leaks

btrfs: fix lost return value due to variable shadowing

2015-03-02T22:04:45Z

A block-local variable stores error code but btrfs_get_blocks_direct may not return it in the end as there's a ret defined in the function scope. CC: # 3.6+ Fixes: d187663ef24c ("Btrfs: lock extents as we map them in DIO") Signed-off-by: David Sterba Signed-off-by: Chris Mason

Merge branch 'for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs

2015-02-19T22:36:00Z

Pull btrfs updates from Chris Mason: "This pull is mostly cleanups and fixes: - The raid5/6 cleanups from Zhao Lei fixup some long standing warts in the code and add improvements on top of the scrubbing support from 3.19. - Josef has round one of our ENOSPC fixes coming from large btrfs clusters here at FB. - Dave Sterba continues a long series of cleanups (thanks Dave), and Filipe continues hammering on corner cases in fsync and others This all was held up a little trying to track down a use-after-free in btrfs raid5/6. It's not clear yet if this is just made easier to trigger with this pull or if its a new bug from the raid5/6 cleanups. Dave Sterba is the only one to trigger it so far, but he has a consistent way to reproduce, so we'll get it nailed shortly" * 'for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/linux-btrfs: (68 commits) Btrfs: don't remove extents and xattrs when logging new names Btrfs: fix fsync data loss after adding hard link to inode Btrfs: fix BUG_ON in btrfs_orphan_add() when delete unused block group Btrfs: account for large extents with enospc Btrfs: don't set and clear delalloc for O_DIRECT writes Btrfs: only adjust outstanding_extents when we do a short write btrfs: Fix out-of-space bug Btrfs: scrub, fix sleep in atomic context Btrfs: fix scheduler warning when syncing log Btrfs: Remove unnecessary placeholder in btrfs_err_code btrfs: cleanup init for list in free-space-cache btrfs: delete chunk allocation attemp when setting block group ro btrfs: clear bio reference after submit_one_bio() Btrfs: fix scrub race leading to use-after-free Btrfs: add missing cleanup on sysfs init failure Btrfs: fix race between transaction commit and empty block group removal btrfs: add more checks to btrfs_read_sys_array btrfs: cleanup, rename a few variables in btrfs_read_sys_array btrfs: add checks for sys_chunk_array sizes btrfs: more superblock checks, lower bounds on devices and sectorsize/nodesize ...

Btrfs: account for large extents with enospc

2015-02-14T16:22:48Z

On our gluster boxes we stream large tar balls of backups onto our fses. With 160gb of ram this means we get really large contiguous ranges of dirty data, but the way our ENOSPC stuff works is that as long as it's contiguous we only hold metadata reservation for one extent. The problem is we limit our extents to 128mb, so we'll end up with at least 800 extents so our enospc accounting is quite a bit lower than what we need. To keep track of this make sure we increase outstanding_extents for every multiple of the max extent size so we can be sure to have enough reserved metadata space. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik Signed-off-by: Chris Mason

Btrfs: don't set and clear delalloc for O_DIRECT writes

2015-02-14T16:19:14Z

We do this to get the space accounting, but this is just needless churn on the io_tree, so just drop setting/clearing delalloc and just drop the reserved data space when we have a successfull allocation. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik Reviewed-by: Liu Bo Signed-off-by: Chris Mason