3.2.102-rc1 review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@xxxxxxxxxx>
commit 55237a5f2431a72435e3ed39e4306e973c0446b7 upstream.
It's possible that btrfs_sync_log() bails out after one of the two
btrfs_write_marked_extents() which convert extent state's state bit into
EXTENT_NEED_WAIT from EXTENT_DIRTY/EXTENT_NEW, however only EXTENT_DIRTY
and EXTENT_NEW are searched by free_log_tree() so that those extent states
with EXTENT_NEED_WAIT lead to memory leak.
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@xxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@xxxxxxxx>
[bwh: Backported to 3.2: adjust context]
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c
@@ -2216,12 +2216,13 @@ static void free_log_tree(struct btrfs_t
while (1) {
ret = find_first_extent_bit(&log->dirty_log_pages,
- 0, &start, &end, EXTENT_DIRTY | EXTENT_NEW);
+ 0, &start, &end,
+ EXTENT_DIRTY | EXTENT_NEW | EXTENT_NEED_WAIT);
if (ret)
break;
clear_extent_bits(&log->dirty_log_pages, start, end,
- EXTENT_DIRTY | EXTENT_NEW, GFP_NOFS);
+ EXTENT_DIRTY | EXTENT_NEW | EXTENT_NEED_WAIT, GFP_NOFS);
}
free_extent_buffer(log->node);
