On 09/03/2014 07:36 PM, Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Sep 2014 16:50:47 -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> For 3.16, please pull these into stable, I've cherry picked and tested
>> them here. For 3.15 and earlier there are a few conflicts, so I'll make
>> a git tree with things to pull.
>>
>> 8d875f95da43c6a8f18f77869f2ef26e9594fecc v3.15+
>
> This ("fix filemap_flush call in btrfs_file_release") is the only one
> that requires some work for 3.14.
>
> There is one conflict in ordered.data.c - just a sligh work queue
> submission change - and the second in transaction.c where the patch does
> not delete enough from btrfs_flush_all_pending_stuffs(), since 3.14 still
> has the old qgroup calls in place. I removed it wholesale and that makes
> everything fit.
>
> The followup ("fix filemap_flush call in btrfs_file_release") then also
> applies.
>
> Should they also go into the next 3.14.x stable cycle? This rename
> deadlock sounds like a possible problem with rsync, which seems like a
> popular use case, and I guess nobody will complain about slightly better
> performance either.
Right, the btrfs_flush_all_pending_stuffs function can just be deleted.
But, Liu Bo's patch isn't required on 3.14 (since the regression he
fixed came with 3.15).
And these changes are big enough that I like to test them a little here
before sending out. I did mark that patch as 3.15+, but really that
deadlock has been there forever. We only started seeing it with 3.15+
because other waitqueue problems made it stand out.
-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
