aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/fs/btrfs/relocation.c (follow)
AgeCommit message (Collapse)AuthorFilesLines
2014-12-12btrfs: sink blocksize parameter to tree_block_processedDavid Sterba1-4/+5
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
2014-12-12btrfs: sink blocksize parameter to readahead_tree_blockDavid Sterba1-2/+1
All callers pass nodesize. Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
2014-10-04Merge branch 'cleanup/blocksize-diet-part1' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kdave/linux into for-linusChris Mason1-22/+6
2014-10-04Merge branch 'cleanup/misc-for-3.18' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kdave/linux into for-linusChris Mason1-2/+1
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com> Conflicts: fs/btrfs/extent_io.c
2014-10-03Btrfs: fix build_backref_tree issue with multiple shared blocksJosef Bacik1-1/+4
Marc Merlin sent me a broken fs image months ago where it would blow up in the upper->checked BUG_ON() in build_backref_tree. This is because we had a scenario like this block a -- level 4 (not shared) | block b -- level 3 (reloc block, shared) | block c -- level 2 (not shared) | block d -- level 1 (shared) | block e -- level 0 (shared) We go to build a backref tree for block e, we notice block d is shared and add it to the list of blocks to lookup it's backrefs for. Now when we loop around we will check edges for the block, so we will see we looked up block c last time. So we lookup block d and then see that the block that points to it is block c and we can just skip that edge since we've already been up this path. The problem is because we clear need_check when we see block d (as it is shared) we never add block b as needing to be checked. And because block c is in our path already we bail out before we walk up to block b and add it to the backref check list. To fix this we need to reset need_check if we trip over a block that doesn't need to be checked. This will make sure that any subsequent blocks in the path as we're walking up afterwards are added to the list to be processed. With this patch I can now mount Marc's fs image and it'll complete the balance without panicing. Thanks, Reported-by: Marc MERLIN <marc@merlins.org> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
2014-10-03Btrfs: cleanup error handling in build_backref_treeJosef Bacik1-29/+59
When balance panics it tends to panic in the BUG_ON(!upper->checked); test, because it means it couldn't build the backref tree properly. This is annoying to users and frankly a recoverable error, nothing in this function is actually fatal since it is just an in-memory building of the backrefs for a given bytenr. So go through and change all the BUG_ON()'s to ASSERT()'s, and fix the BUG_ON(!upper->checked) thing to just return an error. This patch also fixes the error handling so it tears down the work we've done properly. This code was horribly broken since we always just panic'ed instead of actually erroring out, so it needed to be completely re-worked. With this patch my broken image no longer panics when I mount it. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
2014-10-02btrfs: let merge_reloc_roots return voidDavid Sterba1-2/+1
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
2014-10-02btrfs: remove parameter blocksize from read_tree_blockDavid Sterba1-7/+4
We know the tree block size, no need to pass it around. Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
2014-10-02btrfs: inline code of reada_tree_block and remove itDavid Sterba1-10/+2
It's trivial with a single user. And remove one pointless BUG_ON. Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
2014-10-02btrfs: remove unused parameter from readahead_tree_blockDavid Sterba1-7/+2
The parent_transid parameter has been unused since its introduction in ca7a79ad8dbe2466 ("Pass down the expected generation number when reading tree blocks"). In reada_tree_block, it was even wrongly set to leafsize. Transid check is done in the proper read and readahead ignores errors. Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
2014-09-17btrfs: use nodesize everywhere, kill leafsizeDavid Sterba1-11/+10
The nodesize and leafsize were never of different values. Unify the usage and make nodesize the one. Cleanup the redundant checks and helpers. Shaves a few bytes from .text: text data bss dec hex filename 852418 24560 23112 900090 dbbfa btrfs.ko.before 851074 24584 23112 898770 db6d2 btrfs.ko.after Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
2014-09-17btrfs: clenaup: don't call btrfs_release_path before free_pathDavid Sterba1-1/+0
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
2014-06-09btrfs: remove stale newlines from log messagesDavid Sterba1-2/+2
I've noticed an extra line after "use no compression", but search revealed much more in messages of more critical levels and rare errors. Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
2014-06-09Btrfs: use bitfield instead of integer data type for the some variants in btrfs_rootMiao Xie1-8/+9
Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong <wangsl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
2014-04-06Btrfs: do not reset last_snapshot after relocationJosef Bacik1-21/+0
This was done to allow NO_COW to continue to be NO_COW after relocation but it is not right. When relocating we will convert blocks to FULL_BACKREF that we relocate. We can leave some of these full backref blocks behind if they are not cow'ed out during the relocation, like if we fail the relocation with ENOSPC and then just drop the reloc tree. Then when we go to cow the block again we won't lookup the extent flags because we won't think there has been a snapshot recently which means we will do our normal ref drop thing instead of adding back a tree ref and dropping the shared ref. This will cause btrfs_free_extent to blow up because it can't find the ref we are trying to free. This was found with my ref verifying tool. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
2014-03-10Btrfs: don't flush all delalloc inodes when we doesn't get s_umount lockMiao Xie1-1/+1
We needn't flush all delalloc inodes when we doesn't get s_umount lock, or we would make the tasks wait for a long time. Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
2014-01-28Btrfs: fix an oops when we fail to relocate tree blocksWang Shilong1-0/+6
During balance test, we hit an oops: [ 2013.841551] kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/relocation.c:1174! The problem is that if we fail to relocate tree blocks, we should update backref cache, otherwise, some pending nodes are not updated while snapshot check @cache->last_trans is within one transaction and won't update it and then oops happen. Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong <wangsl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
2014-01-28Btrfs: fix an oops when we fail to merge reloc rootsWang Shilong1-7/+3
Previously, we will free reloc root memory and then force filesystem to be readonly. The problem is that there may be another thread commiting transaction which will try to access freed reloc root during merging reloc roots process. To keep consistency snapshots shared space, we should allow snapshot finished if possible, so here we don't free reloc root memory. signed-off-by: Wang Shilong <wangsl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
2014-01-28Btrfs: remove unused argument from select_reloc_root()Wang Shilong1-4/+2
@nr is no longer used, remove it from select_reloc_root() Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong <wangsl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
2014-01-28Btrfs: convert printk to btrfs_ and fix BTRFS prefixFrank Holton1-2/+2
Convert all applicable cases of printk and pr_* to the btrfs_* macros. Fix all uses of the BTRFS prefix. Signed-off-by: Frank Holton <fholton@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
2014-01-28Btrfs: remove unnecessary filemap writting and waiting after block group relocationWang Shilong1-5/+0
We have commited transaction before, remove redundant filemap writting and waiting here, it can speed up balance relocation process. Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong <wangsl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
2014-01-28Btrfs: improve forever loop when doing balance relocationWang Shilong1-38/+36
We hit a forever loop when doing balance relocation,the reason is that we firstly reserve 4M(node size is 16k).and within transaction we will try to add extra reservation for snapshot roots,this will return -EAGAIN if there has been a thread flushing space to reserve space.We will do this again and again with filesystem becoming nearly full. If the above '-EAGAIN' case happens, we try to refill reservation more outsize of transaction, and this will return eariler in enospc case,however, this dosen't really hurt because it makes no sense doing balance relocation with the filesystem nearly full. Miao Xie helped a lot to track this issue, thanks. Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong <wangsl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
2013-12-12Btrfs: make sure we cleanup all reloc roots if error happensWang Shilong1-0/+7
I hit an oops when merging reloc roots fails, the reason is that new reloc roots may be added and we should make sure we cleanup all reloc roots. Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong <wangsl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
2013-12-12Btrfs: skip building backref tree for uuid and quota tree when doing balance relocationWang Shilong1-1/+3
Quota tree and UUID Tree is only cowed, they can not be snapshoted. Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong <wangsl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
2013-12-12Btrfs: fix an oops when doing balance relocationWang Shilong1-23/+47
I hit an oops when inserting reloc root into @reloc_root_tree(it can be easily triggered when forcing cow for relocation root) [ 866.494539] [<ffffffffa0499579>] btrfs_init_reloc_root+0x79/0xb0 [btrfs] [ 866.495321] [<ffffffffa044c240>] record_root_in_trans+0xb0/0x110 [btrfs] [ 866.496109] [<ffffffffa044d758>] btrfs_record_root_in_trans+0x48/0x80 [btrfs] [ 866.496908] [<ffffffffa0494da8>] select_reloc_root+0xa8/0x210 [btrfs] [ 866.497703] [<ffffffffa0495c8a>] do_relocation+0x16a/0x540 [btrfs] This is because reloc root inserted into @reloc_root_tree is not within one transaction,reloc root may be cowed and root block bytenr will be reused then oops happens.We should update reloc root in @reloc_root_tree when cow reloc root node, fix it. Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong <wangsl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> Reviewed-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
2013-11-11Btrfs: rename btrfs_start_all_delalloc_inodesMiao Xie1-1/+1
rename the function -- btrfs_start_all_delalloc_inodes(), and make its name be compatible to btrfs_wait_ordered_roots(), since they are always used at the same place. Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
2013-11-11Btrfs: don't wait for the completion of all the ordered extentsMiao Xie1-1/+1
It is very likely that there are lots of ordered extents in the filesytem, if we wait for the completion of all of them when we want to reclaim some space for the metadata space reservation, we would be blocked for a long time. The performance would drop down suddenly for a long time. Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
2013-11-11btrfs: Use WARN_ON()'s return value in place of WARN_ON(1)Dulshani Gunawardhana1-9/+4
Use WARN_ON()'s return value in place of WARN_ON(1) for cleaner source code that outputs a more descriptive warnings. Also fix the styling warning of redundant braces that came up as a result of this fix. Signed-off-by: Dulshani Gunawardhana <dulshani.gunawardhana89@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Zach Brown <zab@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
2013-11-11Btrfs: use 'u64' rather than 'int' to get extent's generationWang Shilong1-1/+1
We define a 'int' to get extent's generation by mistake,fix it. Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong <wangsl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
2013-11-11Btrfs: stop committing the transaction so much during relocateJosef Bacik1-20/+13
I noticed with my horrible snapshot excercisor that we were taking forever to relocate the larger the file system got. This appeared to be because we were committing the transaction _constantly_. There were a few places where we do braindead things with metadata reservation, like start a transaction and then try to refill the block rsv, which not only keeps us from committing a transaction during the enospc stuff, but keeps us from doing some of the harder flushing work which will make us more likely to need to commit the transaction. We also were checking the block rsv and committing the transaction if the block rsv was below a certain threshold, but we were doing this in a place where we don't actually keep anything in the block rsv so this was always ending up false so we always committed the transaction in this case. I tested this to make sure it didn't break anything, but it takes about 10 hours to get the box to this state so I don't know how much of an impact it will really make. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
2013-11-11Btrfs: return an error from btrfs_wait_ordered_rangeJosef Bacik1-1/+6
I noticed that if the free space cache has an error writing out it's data it won't actually error out, it will just carry on. This is because it doesn't check the return value of btrfs_wait_ordered_range, which didn't actually return anything. So fix this in order to keep us from making free space cache look valid when it really isnt. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
2013-11-11Btrfs: fix BUG_ON() casued by the reserved space migrationMiao Xie1-2/+4
When we did space balance and snapshot creation at the same time, we might meet the following oops: kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/inode.c:3038! [SNIP] Call Trace: [<ffffffffa0411ec7>] btrfs_orphan_cleanup+0x293/0x407 [btrfs] [<ffffffffa042dc45>] btrfs_mksubvol.isra.28+0x259/0x373 [btrfs] [<ffffffffa042de85>] btrfs_ioctl_snap_create_transid+0x126/0x156 [btrfs] [<ffffffffa042dff1>] btrfs_ioctl_snap_create_v2+0xd0/0x121 [btrfs] [<ffffffffa0430b2c>] btrfs_ioctl+0x414/0x1854 [btrfs] [<ffffffff813b60b7>] ? __do_page_fault+0x305/0x379 [<ffffffff811215a9>] vfs_ioctl+0x1d/0x39 [<ffffffff81121d7c>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x32d/0x3e2 [<ffffffff81057fe7>] ? finish_task_switch+0x80/0xb8 [<ffffffff81121e88>] SyS_ioctl+0x57/0x83 [<ffffffff813b39ff>] ? do_device_not_available+0x12/0x14 [<ffffffff813b99c2>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b [SNIP] RIP [<ffffffffa040da40>] btrfs_orphan_add+0xc3/0x126 [btrfs] The reason of the problem is that the relocation root creation stole the reserved space, which was reserved for orphan item deletion. There are several ways to fix this problem, one is to increasing the reserved space size of the space balace, and then we can use that space to create the relocation tree for each fs/file trees. But it is hard to calculate the suitable size because we doesn't know how many fs/file trees we need relocate. We fixed this problem by reserving the space for relocation root creation actively since the space it need is very small (one tree block, used for root node copy), then we use that reserved space to create the relocation tree. If we don't reserve space for relocation tree creation, we will use the reserved space of the balance. Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
2013-11-11Btrfs: relocate csums properly with prealloc extentsJosef Bacik1-3/+15
A user reported a problem where they were getting csum errors when running a balance and running systemd's journal. This is because systemd is awesome and fallocate()'s its log space and writes into it. Unfortunately we assume that when we read in all the csums for an extent that they are sequential starting at the bytenr we care about. This obviously isn't the case for prealloc extents, where we could have written to the middle of the prealloc extent only, which means the csum would be for the bytenr in the middle of our range and not the front of our range. Fix this by offsetting the new bytenr we are logging to based on the original bytenr the csum was for. With this patch I no longer see the csum errors I was seeing. Thanks, Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Reported-by: Chris Murphy <lists@colorremedies.com> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
2013-11-11Btrfs: remove path arg from btrfs_truncate_free_space_cacheFilipe David Borba Manana1-10/+1
Not used for anything, and removing it avoids caller's need to allocate a path structure. Signed-off-by: Filipe David Borba Manana <fdmanana@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
2013-10-10Btrfs: fix oops caused by the space balance and dead rootsMiao Xie1-1/+1
When doing space balance and subvolume destroy at the same time, we met the following oops: kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/relocation.c:2247! RIP: 0010: [<ffffffffa04cec16>] prepare_to_merge+0x154/0x1f0 [btrfs] Call Trace: [<ffffffffa04b5ab7>] relocate_block_group+0x466/0x4e6 [btrfs] [<ffffffffa04b5c7a>] btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x143/0x275 [btrfs] [<ffffffffa0495c56>] btrfs_relocate_chunk.isra.27+0x5c/0x5a2 [btrfs] [<ffffffffa0459871>] ? btrfs_item_key_to_cpu+0x15/0x31 [btrfs] [<ffffffffa048b46a>] ? btrfs_get_token_64+0x7e/0xcd [btrfs] [<ffffffffa04a3467>] ? btrfs_tree_read_unlock_blocking+0xb2/0xb7 [btrfs] [<ffffffffa049907d>] btrfs_balance+0x9c7/0xb6f [btrfs] [<ffffffffa049ef84>] btrfs_ioctl_balance+0x234/0x2ac [btrfs] [<ffffffffa04a1e8e>] btrfs_ioctl+0xd87/0x1ef9 [btrfs] [<ffffffff81122f53>] ? path_openat+0x234/0x4db [<ffffffff813c3b78>] ? __do_page_fault+0x31d/0x391 [<ffffffff810f8ab6>] ? vma_link+0x74/0x94 [<ffffffff811250f5>] vfs_ioctl+0x1d/0x39 [<ffffffff811258c8>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x32d/0x3e2 [<ffffffff811259d4>] SyS_ioctl+0x57/0x83 [<ffffffff813c3bfa>] ? do_page_fault+0xe/0x10 [<ffffffff813c73c2>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b It is because we returned the error number if the reference of the root was 0 when doing space relocation. It was not right here, because though the root was dead(refs == 0), but the space it held still need be relocated, or we could not remove the block group. So in this case, we should return the root no matter it is dead or not. Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
2013-09-21Btrfs: kill delay_iput arg to the wait_ordered functionsJosef Bacik1-1/+1
This is a left over of how we used to wait for ordered extents, which was to grab the inode and then run filemap flush on it. However if we have an ordered extent then we already are holding a ref on the inode, and we just use btrfs_start_ordered_extent anyway, so there is no reason to have an extra ref on the inode to start work on the ordered extent. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
2013-09-21Btrfs: fixup error handling in btrfs_reloc_cowJosef Bacik1-17/+24
If we failed to actually allocate the correct size of the extent to relocate we will end up in an infinite loop because we won't return an error, we'll just move on to the next extent. So fix this up by returning an error, and then fix all the callers to return an error up the stack rather than BUG_ON()'ing. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
2013-09-01Btrf: cleanup: don't check for root_refs == 0 twiceStefan Behrens1-3/+0
btrfs_read_fs_root_no_name() already checks if btrfs_root_refs() is zero and returns ENOENT in this case. There is no need to do it again in three more places. Signed-off-by: Stefan Behrens <sbehrens@giantdisaster.de> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
2013-09-01Btrfs: Remove superfluous casts from u64 to unsigned long longGeert Uytterhoeven1-4/+3
u64 is "unsigned long long" on all architectures now, so there's no need to cast it when formatting it using the "ll" length modifier. Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
2013-09-01Btrfs: change how we queue blocks for backref checkingJosef Bacik1-7/+7
Previously we only added blocks to the list to have their backrefs checked if the level of the block is right above the one we are searching for. This is because we want to make sure we don't add the entire path up to the root to the lists to make sure we process things one at a time. This assumes that if any blocks in the path to the root are going to be not checked (shared in other words) then they will be in the level right above the current block on up. This isn't quite right though since we can have blocks higher up the list that are shared because they are attached to a reloc root. But we won't add this block to be checked and then later on we will BUG_ON(!upper->checked). So instead keep track of wether or not we've queued a block to be checked in this current search, and if we haven't go ahead and queue it to be checked. This patch fixed the panic I was seeing where we BUG_ON(!upper->checked). Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
2013-09-01Btrfs: check to see if we have an inline item properlyJosef Bacik1-0/+5
If our item isn't big enough to have an actual inline item when we have skinny metadata enabled just return 1 in find_inline_backref so we can move on to the next item. This probably wasn't causing a problem since we check the values of ptr and end properly, but just in case this will keep us from doing extra work. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
2013-09-01Btrfs: cleanup reloc roots properly on errorJosef Bacik1-1/+6
I was hitting the BUG_ON() at the end of merge_reloc_roots() because we were aborting the transaction at some point previously and then getting an error when we tried to drop the reloc root. I fixed btrfs_drop_snapshot to re-add us to the dead roots list if we failed, but this isn't the right thing to do for reloc roots since it uses root->root_list for it's own stuff in order to know what needs to be cleaned up. So fix btrfs_drop_snapshot to only do the re-add if we aren't dropping for reloc, and handle errors from merge_reloc_root() by dropping the reloc root we are processing since it won't be on the list of roots to cleanup. With this patch my reproducer no longer panics. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
2013-09-01Btrfs: add missing error checks to add_data_referencesFilipe David Borba Manana1-1/+6
The function relocation.c:add_data_references() was not checking if all calls to __add_tree_block() and find_data_references() were succeeding or not. Signed-off-by: Filipe David Borba Manana <fdmanana@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>
2013-07-02Btrfs: remove btrfs_sector_sum structureMiao Xie1-11/+3
Using the structure btrfs_sector_sum to keep the checksum value is unnecessary, because the extents that btrfs_sector_sum points to are continuous, we can find out the expected checksums by btrfs_ordered_sum's bytenr and the offset, so we can remove btrfs_sector_sum's bytenr. After removing bytenr, there is only one member in the structure, so it makes no sense to keep the structure, just remove it, and use a u32 array to store the checksum value. By this change, we don't use the while loop to get the checksums one by one. Now, we can get several checksum value at one time, it improved the performance by ~74% on my SSD (31MB/s -> 54MB/s). test command: # dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/btrfs/file0 bs=1M count=1024 oflag=sync Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
2013-07-01Btrfs: fix not being able to find skinny extents during relocateJosef Bacik1-8/+27
We unconditionally search for the EXTENT_ITEM_KEY for metadata during balance, and then check the key that we found to see if it is actually a METADATA_ITEM_KEY, but this doesn't work right because METADATA is a higher key value, so if what we are looking for happens to be the first item in the leaf the search will dump us out at the previous leaf, and we won't find our item. So instead do what we do everywhere else, search for the skinny extent first and if we don't find it go back and re-search for the extent item. This patch fixes the panic I was hitting when balancing a large file system with skinny extents. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
2013-07-01Btrfs: fix broken nocow after balanceMiao Xie1-0/+44
Balance will create reloc_root for each fs root, and it's going to record last_snapshot to filter shared blocks. The side effect of setting last_snapshot is to break nocow attributes of files. Since the extents are not shared by the relocation tree after the balance, we can recover the old last_snapshot safely if no one snapshoted the source tree. We fix the above problem by this way. Reported-by: Kyle Gates <kylegates@hotmail.com> Signed-off-by: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
2013-06-14Btrfs: introduce per-subvolume ordered extent listMiao Xie1-1/+1
The reason we introduce per-subvolume ordered extent list is the same as the per-subvolume delalloc inode list. Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
2013-06-14Btrfs: introduce per-subvolume delalloc inode listMiao Xie1-1/+1
When we create a snapshot, we need flush all delalloc inodes in the fs, just flushing the inodes in the source tree is OK. So we introduce per-subvolume delalloc inode list. Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
2013-06-14Btrfs: cleanup the similar code of the fs root readMiao Xie1-3/+2
There are several functions whose code is similar, such as btrfs_find_last_root() btrfs_read_fs_root_no_radix() Besides that, some functions are invoked twice, it is unnecessary, for example, we are sure that all roots which is found in btrfs_find_orphan_roots() have their orphan items, so it is unnecessary to check the orphan item again. So cleanup it. Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
2013-06-08Btrfs: init relocate extent_io_tree with a mappingJosef Bacik1-4/+5
Dave reported a NULL pointer deref. This is caused because he thought he'd be smart and add sanity checks to the extent_io bit operations, but he didn't expect a tree to have a NULL mapping. To fix this we just need to init the relocation's processed_blocks with the btree_inode->i_mapping. Thanks, Reported-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@fusionio.com>