Hello David, > On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 05:25:18PM +0800, Wang Shilong wrote: >> Steps to reproduce: >> # mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/sda8 >> # mount /dev/sda8 /mnt >> # btrfs sub snapshot -r /mnt /mnt/snap1 >> # btrfs sub snapshot -r /mnt /mnt/snap2 >> # btrfs send /mnt/snap1 -p /mnt/snap2 -f /mnt/1 >> # dmesg >> >> The problem is that we will sort clone roots(include @send_root), it >> might push @send_root before thus @send_root's @send_in_progress will >> be decreased twice. > > Of course, the sort(). I think your fix adds some complexity that's not > necessary. Whether the clone_roots array is sorted is not important, we > just have to process each root once. > > send_root becomes a clone_root member, so the missing part is to account > in the rollback counter: > > --- a/fs/btrfs/send.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/send.c > @@ -4937,6 +4937,7 @@ long btrfs_ioctl_send(struct file *mnt_file, void __user *arg_) > * for possible clone sources. > */ > sctx->clone_roots[sctx->clone_roots_cnt++].root = sctx->send_root; > + clone_sources_to_rollback++; Not really, If we fail to come here, we still need decrease @send_root. Please correct me if i miss something here.^_^ Thanks, Wang > > /* We do a bsearch later */ > sort(sctx->clone_roots, sctx->clone_roots_cnt, > @@ -4961,7 +4962,6 @@ out: > btrfs_root_dec_send_in_progress(sctx->clone_roots[i].root); > if (sctx && !IS_ERR_OR_NULL(sctx->parent_root)) > btrfs_root_dec_send_in_progress(sctx->parent_root); > - btrfs_root_dec_send_in_progress(send_root); > > kfree(arg); > vfree(clone_sources_tmp); > --- > -- > 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 -- 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
