On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 2:31 PM David Sterba <dsterba@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 02:48:29PM +0000, 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. > > Is this patch ok for for-next or does it need more work? Thanks. Nop, it's no good (despite not triggering problems initially), due to Qu's first question. So just drop it and forget it. Thanks.
