[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20240712-b4-rst-updates-v3-3-5cf27dac98a7@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2024 09:48:38 +0200
From: Johannes Thumshirn <jth@...nel.org>
To: Chris Mason <clm@...com>, Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>,
David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>
Cc: linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Qu Wenru <wqu@...e.com>, Filipe Manana <fdmanana@...e.com>,
Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@....com>
Subject: [PATCH v3 3/3] btrfs: update stripe_extent delete loop assumptions
From: Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@....com>
btrfs_delete_raid_extent() was written under the assumption, that it's
call-chain always passes a start, length tuple that matches a single
extent. But btrfs_delete_raid_extent() is called by
do_free_extent_acounting() which in term is called by
__btrfs_free_extent().
But this call-chain passes in a start address and a length that can
possibly match multiple on-disk extents.
To make this possible, we have to adjust the start and length of each
btree node lookup, to not delete beyond the requested range.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@....com>
Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@...e.com>
---
fs/btrfs/raid-stripe-tree.c | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/raid-stripe-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/raid-stripe-tree.c
index 53ca2c1a32ac..684d4744f02d 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/raid-stripe-tree.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/raid-stripe-tree.c
@@ -66,6 +66,11 @@ int btrfs_delete_raid_extent(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, u64 start, u64 le
if (ret)
break;
+ start += key.offset;
+ length -= key.offset;
+ if (length == 0)
+ break;
+
btrfs_release_path(path);
}
--
2.43.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists