On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 06:57:41PM +0200, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
> > +static void btrfs_cleanup_pending_block_groups(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans)
> > +{
> > + struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info = trans->fs_info;
> > + struct btrfs_block_group_cache *block_group;
> > +
> > + while (!list_empty(&trans->new_bgs)) {
> > + block_group = list_first_entry(&trans->new_bgs,
> > + struct btrfs_block_group_cache,
> > + bg_list);
> > + btrfs_delayed_refs_rsv_release(fs_info, 1);
> > + list_del_init(&block_group->bg_list);
> > + }
> > +}
>
> This is much cleaner and understandable, thanks.
>
> nit:Can't we use list_for_each_entry_safe though and save the explicit
> list_first_entry. IMO this is fine here since the transaction is aborted
> hence no new pending bgs can be added to the ->new_bgs list. In any case:
@@ -1898,12 +1898,9 @@ static inline int btrfs_start_delalloc_flush(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info)
static void btrfs_cleanup_pending_block_groups(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans)
{
struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info = trans->fs_info;
- struct btrfs_block_group_cache *block_group;
+ struct btrfs_block_group_cache *block_group, *tmp;
- while (!list_empty(&trans->new_bgs)) {
- block_group = list_first_entry(&trans->new_bgs,
- struct btrfs_block_group_cache,
- bg_list);
+ list_for_each_entry_safe(block_group, tmp, &trans->new_bgs, bg_list) {
btrfs_delayed_refs_rsv_release(fs_info, 1);
list_del_init(&block_group->bg_list);
Looks better than the version I copied from create_pending_bgs, the
transaction is going to be freed soon so there should be no new entries,
indeed.