I hit this a couple times while working on my fsync patch (all my bugs, not
normal operation), but with my new stuff we could have new errors from cases
I have not encountered, so instead of BUG()'ing we should be WARN()'ing so
that we are notified there is a problem but the user doesn't lose their
data. We can easily commit the transaction in the case that the tree
logging fails and still be fine, so let's try and be as nice to the user as
possible. Thanks,
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c
index 5190cd6..b5b6323 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c
@@ -3346,7 +3346,7 @@ int btrfs_log_inode_parent(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
end_trans:
dput(old_parent);
if (ret < 0) {
- BUG_ON(ret != -ENOSPC);
+ WARN_ON(ret != -ENOSPC);
root->fs_info->last_trans_log_full_commit = trans->transid;
ret = 1;
}
--
1.7.7.6
--
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
