xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 3/4] xfs: exact busy extent tracking

To: Alex Elder <aelder@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] xfs: exact busy extent tracking
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 00:13:39 -0400
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1303416500.2581.519.camel@doink>
References: <20110418065936.355024592@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20110418070043.915023373@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1303416500.2581.519.camel@doink>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
> In xfs_alloc_busy_trim():
> > @@ -2894,6 +2959,11 @@ fail:
> >      * re-check if the trimmed extent satisfies the minlen requirement.
> >      */
> >     spin_unlock(&args->pag->pagb_lock);
> > +   if (fbno != bno || flen != len) {
> > +           trace_xfs_alloc_busy_trim(args->mp, args->agno, bno, len,
> > +                                     fbno, flen);
> > +   }
> > +   trace_xfs_alloc_busy_trim(args->mp, args->agno, bno, len, fbno, 0);
> >     *rbno = fbno;
> >     *rlen = 0;
> >  }
> 
> I don't see why you do two trace calls here, the second
> with 0 for the value of flen.

It's a merge error.  The first trace should be for the regular exit,
but managed to sneak down into the fail case, too.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>