On Fri, Aug 07 2009, Yan Zheng wrote:
> invalidate_inode_pages2_range may return -EBUSY occasionally
> which results Oops. This patch fixes the issue by moving
> invalidate_inode_pages2_range into a loop and keeping calling
> it until the return value is not -EBUSY.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yan Zheng <zheng.yan@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> ---
> diff -urp 1/fs/btrfs/relocation.c 2/fs/btrfs/relocation.c
> --- 1/fs/btrfs/relocation.c 2009-07-29 10:03:04.367858774 +0800
> +++ 2/fs/btrfs/relocation.c 2009-08-07 13:26:43.882147138 +0800
> @@ -2553,8 +2553,13 @@ int relocate_inode_pages(struct inode *i
> last_index = (start + len - 1) >> PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT;
>
> /* make sure the dirty trick played by the caller work */
> - ret = invalidate_inode_pages2_range(inode->i_mapping,
> - first_index, last_index);
> + while (1) {
> + ret = invalidate_inode_pages2_range(inode->i_mapping,
> + first_index, last_index);
> + if (ret != -EBUSY)
> + break;
> + cond_resched();
> + }
If it returns EBUSY, would it not make more sense to call
filemap_write_and_wait_range() instead of hammering on invalidate?
--
Jens Axboe
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
