| /openbmc/linux/fs/btrfs/ |
| H A D | send.c | 521e0546 Tue Apr 15 09:41:44 CDT 2014 David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz> btrfs: protect snapshots from deleting during send
The patch "Btrfs: fix protection between send and root deletion"
(18f687d538449373c37c) does not actually prevent to delete the snapshot
and just takes care during background cleaning, but this seems rather
user unfriendly, this patch implements the idea presented in
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-btrfs/msg30813.html
- add an internal root_item flag to denote a dead root
- check if the send_in_progress is set and refuse to delete, otherwise
set the flag and proceed
- check the flag in send similar to the btrfs_root_readonly checks, for
all involved roots
The root lookup in send via btrfs_read_fs_root_no_name will check if the
root is really dead or not. If it is, ENOENT, aborted send. If it's
alive, it's protected by send_in_progress, send can continue.
CC: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
CC: Wang Shilong <wangsl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
521e0546 Tue Apr 15 09:41:44 CDT 2014 David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz> btrfs: protect snapshots from deleting during send
The patch "Btrfs: fix protection between send and root deletion"
(18f687d538449373c37c) does not actually prevent to delete the snapshot
and just takes care during background cleaning, but this seems rather
user unfriendly, this patch implements the idea presented in
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-btrfs/msg30813.html
- add an internal root_item flag to denote a dead root
- check if the send_in_progress is set and refuse to delete, otherwise
set the flag and proceed
- check the flag in send similar to the btrfs_root_readonly checks, for
all involved roots
The root lookup in send via btrfs_read_fs_root_no_name will check if the
root is really dead or not. If it is, ENOENT, aborted send. If it's
alive, it's protected by send_in_progress, send can continue.
CC: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
CC: Wang Shilong <wangsl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
|
| H A D | ioctl.c | 521e0546 Tue Apr 15 09:41:44 CDT 2014 David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz> btrfs: protect snapshots from deleting during send
The patch "Btrfs: fix protection between send and root deletion"
(18f687d538449373c37c) does not actually prevent to delete the snapshot
and just takes care during background cleaning, but this seems rather
user unfriendly, this patch implements the idea presented in
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-btrfs/msg30813.html
- add an internal root_item flag to denote a dead root
- check if the send_in_progress is set and refuse to delete, otherwise
set the flag and proceed
- check the flag in send similar to the btrfs_root_readonly checks, for
all involved roots
The root lookup in send via btrfs_read_fs_root_no_name will check if the
root is really dead or not. If it is, ENOENT, aborted send. If it's
alive, it's protected by send_in_progress, send can continue.
CC: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
CC: Wang Shilong <wangsl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
521e0546 Tue Apr 15 09:41:44 CDT 2014 David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz> btrfs: protect snapshots from deleting during send
The patch "Btrfs: fix protection between send and root deletion"
(18f687d538449373c37c) does not actually prevent to delete the snapshot
and just takes care during background cleaning, but this seems rather
user unfriendly, this patch implements the idea presented in
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-btrfs/msg30813.html
- add an internal root_item flag to denote a dead root
- check if the send_in_progress is set and refuse to delete, otherwise
set the flag and proceed
- check the flag in send similar to the btrfs_root_readonly checks, for
all involved roots
The root lookup in send via btrfs_read_fs_root_no_name will check if the
root is really dead or not. If it is, ENOENT, aborted send. If it's
alive, it's protected by send_in_progress, send can continue.
CC: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
CC: Wang Shilong <wangsl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
|
| H A D | ctree.h | 521e0546 Tue Apr 15 09:41:44 CDT 2014 David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz> btrfs: protect snapshots from deleting during send
The patch "Btrfs: fix protection between send and root deletion"
(18f687d538449373c37c) does not actually prevent to delete the snapshot
and just takes care during background cleaning, but this seems rather
user unfriendly, this patch implements the idea presented in
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-btrfs/msg30813.html
- add an internal root_item flag to denote a dead root
- check if the send_in_progress is set and refuse to delete, otherwise
set the flag and proceed
- check the flag in send similar to the btrfs_root_readonly checks, for
all involved roots
The root lookup in send via btrfs_read_fs_root_no_name will check if the
root is really dead or not. If it is, ENOENT, aborted send. If it's
alive, it's protected by send_in_progress, send can continue.
CC: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
CC: Wang Shilong <wangsl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
521e0546 Tue Apr 15 09:41:44 CDT 2014 David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz> btrfs: protect snapshots from deleting during send
The patch "Btrfs: fix protection between send and root deletion"
(18f687d538449373c37c) does not actually prevent to delete the snapshot
and just takes care during background cleaning, but this seems rather
user unfriendly, this patch implements the idea presented in
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-btrfs/msg30813.html
- add an internal root_item flag to denote a dead root
- check if the send_in_progress is set and refuse to delete, otherwise
set the flag and proceed
- check the flag in send similar to the btrfs_root_readonly checks, for
all involved roots
The root lookup in send via btrfs_read_fs_root_no_name will check if the
root is really dead or not. If it is, ENOENT, aborted send. If it's
alive, it's protected by send_in_progress, send can continue.
CC: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
CC: Wang Shilong <wangsl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
|