[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4d25ee0c-ba57-cd3f-7a6a-981a21c0967d@oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 17:53:21 +0800
From: Anand Jain <anand.jain@...cle.com>
To: xiakaixu1987@...il.com, clm@...com, josef@...icpanda.com,
dsterba@...e.com
Cc: linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Kaixu Xia <kaixuxia@...cent.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] btrfs: return EAGAIN when receiving a pending signal
in the defrag loops
On 18/11/20 12:02 pm, xiakaixu1987@...il.com wrote:
> From: Kaixu Xia <kaixuxia@...cent.com>
>
> The variable ret is overwritten by the following variable defrag_count.
> Actually the code should return EAGAIN when receiving a pending signal
> in the defrag loops.
>
> Reported-by: Tosk Robot <tencent_os_robot@...cent.com>
> Signed-off-by: Kaixu Xia <kaixuxia@...cent.com>
> ---
> v2
> -return EAGAIN instead of remove the EAGAIN error.
Sorry I might have missed in v1. Why was EAGAIN needed here?
Return of defrag_count rather makes sense to me as of now.
Thanks, Anand
>
> fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
> index 69a384145dc6..6f13db6d30bd 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
> @@ -1519,7 +1519,7 @@ int btrfs_defrag_file(struct inode *inode, struct file *file,
> if (btrfs_defrag_cancelled(fs_info)) {
> btrfs_debug(fs_info, "defrag_file cancelled");
> ret = -EAGAIN;
> - break;
> + goto out_ra;
> }
>
> if (!should_defrag_range(inode, (u64)i << PAGE_SHIFT,
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists