Searched hist:b6c60c80 (Results 1 – 1 of 1) sorted by relevance
| /openbmc/linux/fs/btrfs/ |
| H A D | relocation.c | b6c60c80 Tue Jul 30 15:30:30 CDT 2013 Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Btrfs: change how we queue blocks for backref checking
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>
b6c60c80 Tue Jul 30 15:30:30 CDT 2013 Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> Btrfs: change how we queue blocks for backref checking
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>
|