On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 10:19:46AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote: > On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 06:45:59AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > I think the problem is that the extents -> btree conversion does not > > use the per-AG reservations, but it should probably use it (even if it > > predates if of course). > > > > In the reproduce the fs still has enough blocks to allocate the > > one block for the first bmap btree leave. But all free space sits > > in AGs with a lower agno then what we used for allocating the actual > > extent, and thus xfs_alloc_vextent never manages to allocate it. > > Not that I have any insight into the problem here... :P but I'm still[1] > kind of wondering how that mechanism is supposed to work when it > ultimately calls xfs_mod_fdblocks() for each AG..? Oh, heh, I was meaning to reply to that and never did. :( Will go work on that! --D > > Brian > > [1] http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-xfs/msg01509.html > > > -- > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in > > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
