On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 03:18:25PM -0700, Allison Collins wrote:
> Factor out new helper function xfs_attr_leaf_try_add.
> Because new delayed attribute routines cannot roll
> transactions, we carve off the parts of
> xfs_attr_leaf_addname that we can use. This will help
> to reduce repetitive code later when we introduce
> delayed attributes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Allison Collins <allison.henderson@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
> 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr.c
> index 7a6dd37..f27e2c6 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr.c
> @@ -593,19 +593,12 @@ xfs_attr_shortform_addname(xfs_da_args_t *args)
> * External routines when attribute list is one block
> *========================================================================*/
>
> -/*
> - * Add a name to the leaf attribute list structure
> - *
> - * This leaf block cannot have a "remote" value, we only call this routine
> - * if bmap_one_block() says there is only one block (ie: no remote blks).
> - */
> STATIC int
> -xfs_attr_leaf_addname(
> - struct xfs_da_args *args)
> +xfs_attr_leaf_try_add(
> + struct xfs_da_args *args,
> + struct xfs_buf *bp)
> {
> - struct xfs_buf *bp;
> - int retval, error, forkoff;
> - struct xfs_inode *dp = args->dp;
> + int retval, error;
It looks like we could pick either retval or error and use it
consistently throughout the new function.
>
> trace_xfs_attr_leaf_addname(args);
>
I also wonder if this tracepoint should remain in the caller.
> @@ -650,13 +643,35 @@ xfs_attr_leaf_addname(
> retval = xfs_attr3_leaf_add(bp, args);
> if (retval == -ENOSPC) {
> /*
> - * Promote the attribute list to the Btree format, then
> - * Commit that transaction so that the node_addname() call
> - * can manage its own transactions.
> + * Promote the attribute list to the Btree format.
> */
> error = xfs_attr3_leaf_to_node(args);
> if (error)
> return error;
> + }
> + return retval;
> +}
> +
> +
> +/*
> + * Add a name to the leaf attribute list structure
> + *
> + * This leaf block cannot have a "remote" value, we only call this routine
> + * if bmap_one_block() says there is only one block (ie: no remote blks).
> + */
> +STATIC int
> +xfs_attr_leaf_addname(struct xfs_da_args *args)
> +{
> + int retval, error, forkoff;
> + struct xfs_buf *bp = NULL;
> + struct xfs_inode *dp = args->dp;
> +
> + retval = xfs_attr_leaf_try_add(args, bp);
> + if (retval == -ENOSPC) {
> + /*
> + * Commit that transaction so that the node_addname() call
> + * can manage its own transactions.
> + */
> error = xfs_defer_finish(&args->trans);
> if (error)
> return error;
Hmm.. I find this bit of factoring a little strange. We do part of the
-ENOSPC handling (leaf to node) in one place and another part
(xfs_defer_finish()) in the caller. I'm assuming we intentionally don't
finish dfops in the new helper because the delayed attr bits shouldn't
do that, but I'm wondering whether the helper should just return -ENOSPC
and the caller should be responsible for whatever needs to happen based
on that in the associated context. Hm?
Brian
> --
> 2.7.4
>
