On 2018/11/8 下午10:48, Filipe Manana wrote: > On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 2:37 PM Filipe Manana <fdmanana@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 2:35 PM Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 2018/11/8 下午9:17, fdmanana@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: >>>> From: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@xxxxxxxx> >>>> >>>> When creating a block group we don't need to set the log for full commit >>>> if the new block group is not used for data. Logged items can only point >>>> to logical addresses of data block groups (through file extent items) so >>>> there is no need to for the next fsync to fallback to a transaction commit >>>> if the new block group is for metadata. >>> >>> Is it possible for the log tree blocks to be allocated in that new block >>> group? >> >> Yes. > > Now I realize what might be your concern, and this would cause trouble. > Surprised this didn't trigger any problem and I had this (together > with other changes) running tests for some weeks already. Maybe it's related metadata chunk pre-allocation so it will be super hard to hit in normal case, or some extent allocation policy preventing us from allocating tree block of newly created bg. Thanks, Qu > >> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Qu >>> >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@xxxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 3 ++- >>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c >>>> index 577878324799..588fbd1606fb 100644 >>>> --- a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c >>>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c >>>> @@ -10112,7 +10112,8 @@ int btrfs_make_block_group(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, u64 bytes_used, >>>> struct btrfs_block_group_cache *cache; >>>> int ret; >>>> >>>> - btrfs_set_log_full_commit(fs_info, trans); >>>> + if (type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_DATA) >>>> + btrfs_set_log_full_commit(fs_info, trans); >>>> >>>> cache = btrfs_create_block_group_cache(fs_info, chunk_offset, size); >>>> if (!cache) >>>> >>>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
