We've seen the following backtrace stack in ftrace or dmesg log,
kworker/u16:10-4244 [000] 241942.480955: function: btrfs_put_ordered_extent
kworker/u16:10-4244 [000] 241942.480956: kernel_stack: <stack trace>
=> finish_ordered_fn (ffffffffa0384475)
=> btrfs_scrubparity_helper (ffffffffa03ca577)
=> btrfs_freespace_write_helper (ffffffffa03ca98e)
=> process_one_work (ffffffff81117b2f)
=> worker_thread (ffffffff81118c2a)
=> kthread (ffffffff81121de0)
=> ret_from_fork (ffffffff81d7087a)
btrfs_scrubparity_helper really shouldn't be shown up.
It's caused by compiler doing inline for our helper function, adding a
noinline tag can fix that.
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/btrfs/async-thread.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/async-thread.c b/fs/btrfs/async-thread.c
index ff0b0be..593709a 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/async-thread.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/async-thread.c
@@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ struct btrfs_workqueue {
static void normal_work_helper(struct btrfs_work *work);
#define BTRFS_WORK_HELPER(name) \
-void btrfs_##name(struct work_struct *arg) \
+noinline void btrfs_##name(struct work_struct *arg) \
{ \
struct btrfs_work *work = container_of(arg, struct btrfs_work, \
normal_work); \
--
2.9.4
--
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
