On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 07:51:02AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> Seems reasonable. I suppose if we do the check at this level rather than
> in the caller, we could move the CIL insert code to the last step before
> we drop ->xc_cil_lock and have an accurate account of the reservation
> pulled off the transaction. E.g.:
>
> {
> ...
> tp->t_ticket->t_curr_res -= len;
> ctx->space_used += len;
>
> /* dump tp on overrun prior to item removal */
> if (tp->t_ticket->t_curr_res < 0)
> xlog_print_tic(tp)
>
> /* reposition to CIL ... */
> list_for_each_entry(lidp, &tp->t_items, lid_trans) {
> ...
> list_move_tail(...);
> }
> spin_unlock(&cil->xc_cil_lock);
> }
>
> ... where xlog_print_tic() can call xlog_print_tic_res() and then dump
> the t_items list as above.
We shouldn't call xlog_print_tic_res() while holding a spinlock
because it calls xfs_force_shutdown(). So I think all the overrun
checks and prints need to be outside the xc_cil_lock.
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
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
