On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 03:20:59PM -0700, Allison Henderson wrote: > During an attr rename operation, blocks are saved for later removal > as rmtblkno2. The rmtblkno is used in the case of needing to alloc > more blocks if not enough were available. However, in the case > that neither rmtblkno or rmtblkno2 are set, we can return as soon > as xfs_attr_node_addname completes, rather than rolling the transaction > with an -EAGAIN return. This extra loop does not hurt anything right > now, but it will be a problem later when we get into log items because > we end up with an empty log transaction. So, add a simple check to > cut out the unneeded iteration. > > Signed-off-by: Allison Henderson <allison.henderson@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr.c | 7 +++++++ > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr.c > index 611dc67..5e81389 100644 > --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr.c > @@ -409,6 +409,13 @@ xfs_attr_set_iter( > if (error) > return error; > > + /* > + * If addname was successful, and we dont need to alloc > + * or remove anymore blks, we're done. > + */ > + if (!args->rmtblkno && !args->rmtblkno2) > + return error; Is there actually an error to return here, or could this be a 'return 0;' ? --D > + > dac->dela_state = XFS_DAS_FOUND_NBLK; > } > return -EAGAIN; > -- > 2.7.4 >
