[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 6/9] xfs: kill xfs_bioerror_relse

To: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] xfs: kill xfs_bioerror_relse
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 11:26:10 -0700
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20140829011236.GB20518@dastard>
References: <1408084747-4540-1-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1408084747-4540-7-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20140829003257.GF17502@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20140829011236.GB20518@dastard>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 11:12:36AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > This is a large change of behavior as it doesn't hit the error
> > path after the xfs_buf_iowait anymore.  While I don't think that
> > that path was entirely correct this version seems to be even less so
> > by not releasing the buffer reference or forcing the shutdown.
> The IO is synchronous, so the previous behaviour did not release
> the buffer here. But, yes, it needs to because we're not running the
> io wait on it anymore. And this happens only during a shutdown, so i
> don't see any need to trigger a shutdown ;)
> As it is, I think this gets properly fixed by the next patch....

Do you have any scenario that might actually exercise this path?  I
enabled xfs_trans_read_buf_io trace events and run xfstests as well
as a few other workloads and couldn't hit it at all.  And when you
think of it: when would be do a trans_get_buf, then not actually
updating it with data and then recurse into a trans_read_buf in
the same transaction?

Maybe it's just time do a bit more of an audit and put this whole
code path to rest.

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