On 2/13/20 5:17 AM, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
On 11.02.20 г. 23:40 ч., Josef Bacik wrote:
I hit the following warning while running my error injection stress testing
------------[ cut here ]------------
WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 1453 at fs/btrfs/space-info.h:108 btrfs_free_reserved_data_space_noquota+0xfd/0x160 [btrfs]
RIP: 0010:btrfs_free_reserved_data_space_noquota+0xfd/0x160 [btrfs]
Call Trace:
btrfs_free_reserved_data_space+0x4f/0x70 [btrfs]
__btrfs_prealloc_file_range+0x378/0x470 [btrfs]
elfcorehdr_read+0x40/0x40
? elfcorehdr_read+0x40/0x40
? btrfs_commit_transaction+0xca/0xa50 [btrfs]
? dput+0xb4/0x2a0
? btrfs_log_dentry_safe+0x55/0x70 [btrfs]
? btrfs_sync_file+0x30e/0x420 [btrfs]
? do_fsync+0x38/0x70
? __x64_sys_fdatasync+0x13/0x20
? do_syscall_64+0x5b/0x1b0
? entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
---[ end trace 70ccb5d0fe51151c ]---
This happens if we fail to insert our reserved file extent. At this
point we've already converted our reservation from ->bytes_may_use to
->bytes_reserved. However once we break we will attempt to free
everything from [cur_offset, end] from ->bytes_may_use, but our extent
reservation will overlap part of this.
Fix this problem by adding ins.offset (our extent allocation size) to
cur_offset so we remove the actual remaining part from ->bytes_may_use.
This contradicts the code, you are adding ins.objectid which is the
offset and not the size. This means either the code is buggy.
Ooops you're right, I was getting lucky because we're making the whole
allocation at once, and ins.objectid was past extent_end so we ended up doing
the right thing, but for the wrong reasons. In fact I need to adjust this for
the other error condition, so I'll fix this up. Thanks,
Josef
