Hello,
>
> On Mon, March 25, 2013 at 12:09 (+0100), Wang Shilong wrote:
>> From: Wang Shilong <wangsl-fnst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> The reason that BUG_ON() happens in these places is just
>> because of ENOMEM.
>>
>> We try ro return ENOMEM rather than trigger BUG_ON(), the
>> caller will abort the transaction thus avoiding the kernel panic.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong <wangsl-fnst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Reviewed-by: Miao Xie <miaox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> fs/btrfs/backref.c | 6 ++++--
>> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/backref.c b/fs/btrfs/backref.c
>> index bd605c8..a5e2beb 100644
>> --- a/fs/btrfs/backref.c
>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/backref.c
>> @@ -900,7 +900,8 @@ again:
>> if (ref->count && ref->root_id && ref->parent == 0) {
>> /* no parent == root of tree */
>> ret = ulist_add(roots, ref->root_id, 0, GFP_NOFS);
>> - BUG_ON(ret < 0);
>> + if (ret)
>> + goto out;
>> }
>> if (ref->count && ref->parent) {
>> struct extent_inode_elem *eie = NULL;
>> @@ -920,6 +921,8 @@ again:
>> ret = ulist_add_merge(refs, ref->parent,
>> (uintptr_t)ref->inode_list,
>> (u64 *)&eie, GFP_NOFS);
>> + if (ret)
>> + goto out;
>> if (!ret && extent_item_pos) {
>
> Remove ret here, too, please.
Thanks for reviewing! I've addressed your comments and
V2 has been sent out.
Thanks,
Wang
>
>> /*
>> * we've recorded that parent, so we must extend
>> @@ -930,7 +933,6 @@ again:
>> eie = eie->next;
>> eie->next = ref->inode_list;
>> }
>> - BUG_ON(ret < 0);
>> }
>> kfree(ref);
>> }
>>
>
> Otherwise,
>
> Reviewed-by: Jan Schmidt <list.btrfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Thanks!
> -Jan
--
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
