On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 06:57:41PM +0200, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > > +static void btrfs_cleanup_pending_block_groups(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans) > > +{ > > + struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info = trans->fs_info; > > + struct btrfs_block_group_cache *block_group; > > + > > + while (!list_empty(&trans->new_bgs)) { > > + block_group = list_first_entry(&trans->new_bgs, > > + struct btrfs_block_group_cache, > > + bg_list); > > + btrfs_delayed_refs_rsv_release(fs_info, 1); > > + list_del_init(&block_group->bg_list); > > + } > > +} > > This is much cleaner and understandable, thanks. > > nit:Can't we use list_for_each_entry_safe though and save the explicit > list_first_entry. IMO this is fine here since the transaction is aborted > hence no new pending bgs can be added to the ->new_bgs list. In any case: @@ -1898,12 +1898,9 @@ static inline int btrfs_start_delalloc_flush(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info) static void btrfs_cleanup_pending_block_groups(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans) { struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info = trans->fs_info; - struct btrfs_block_group_cache *block_group; + struct btrfs_block_group_cache *block_group, *tmp; - while (!list_empty(&trans->new_bgs)) { - block_group = list_first_entry(&trans->new_bgs, - struct btrfs_block_group_cache, - bg_list); + list_for_each_entry_safe(block_group, tmp, &trans->new_bgs, bg_list) { btrfs_delayed_refs_rsv_release(fs_info, 1); list_del_init(&block_group->bg_list); Looks better than the version I copied from create_pending_bgs, the transaction is going to be freed soon so there should be no new entries, indeed.