On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 03:40:13PM +0800, liubo wrote:
> Hi, Chris,
>
> We've found several tiny problems while reading btrfs code.
>
> These problems are mainly about uncheck return value or BUG_ON check.
> They really have an impact on codes' quality, though they will not be
> hit in normal cases.
>
> Here comes some examples:
>
> 1. memory allocation check
> May cause -ENOMEM, btrfs BUG_ON().
>
> static int alloc_reserved_file_extent(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
> ...
> path = btrfs_alloc_path();
> BUG_ON(!path);
Yes we should either use GFP_NOFAIL or we should deal with the error
nicely.
>
> 2. return value's BUG_ON() check
>
> static noinline int update_ref_for_cow(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
> ...
> if (btrfs_block_can_be_shared(root, buf)) {
> ret = btrfs_lookup_extent_info(trans, root, buf->start,
> buf->len, &refs, &flags);
> BUG_ON(ret);
> BUG_ON(refs == 0);
>
>
>
> Is there a plan to improve the above?
> We are helpful on this:)
Definitely. The first step is to find the errors that can just be
dealt with. After that we need to make a way to force the FS into a
readonly state for the really impossible ones.
Both are very good projects ;)
-chris
--
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
