On 25.03.20 г. 17:50 ч., David Sterba wrote: > On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 03:58:04PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: >> v1->v2: >> - Dropped "btrfs: only take normal tickets into account in >> may_commit_transaction" because "btrfs: only check priority tickets for >> priority flushing" should actually fix the problem, and Nikolay pointed out >> that evict uses the priority list but is allowed to commit, so we need to take >> into account priority tickets sometimes. >> - Added "btrfs: allow us to use up to 90% of the global rsv for" so that the >> global rsv change was separate from the serialization patch. >> - Fixed up some changelogs. >> - Dropped an extra trace_printk that made it into v2. > > The patchset seems to be based on some other, code I think it's the > tickets for data chunks. The compilation fails because > BTRFS_RESERVE_FLUSH_DATA is not defined, but it's mentioned in several > patches. > > If the base patchset is a hard requirement then both would need to go in > at the same time, otherwise if it's possible to refresh this branch I > could add it to for-next now. > No, the data ticket is not a hard requirement. I've tested this branch on our SLE kernels without it. So the conflict resolution is really mino - simply removing the conditions involving BTRFS_RESERVE_FLUSH_DATA.
