On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 05:14:54PM +0000, Filipe Manana wrote: > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 4:53 PM Josef Bacik <jo...@toxicpanda.com> wrote: > > > > From: Josef Bacik <jba...@fb.com> > > > > When debugging some weird extent reference bug I suspected that we were > > changing a snapshot while we were deleting it, which could explain my > > bug. This was indeed what was happening, and this patch helped me > > verify my theory. It is never correct to modify the snapshot once it's > > being deleted, so mark the root when we are deleting it and make sure we > > complain about it when it happens. > > > > Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jo...@toxicpanda.com> > > --- > > fs/btrfs/ctree.c | 3 +++ > > fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 1 + > > fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 9 +++++++++ > > 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c > > index 5912a97b07a6..5f82f86085e8 100644 > > --- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.c > > +++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.c > > @@ -1440,6 +1440,9 @@ noinline int btrfs_cow_block(struct > > btrfs_trans_handle *trans, > > u64 search_start; > > int ret; > > > > + if (test_bit(BTRFS_ROOT_DELETING, &root->state)) > > + WARN(1, KERN_CRIT "cow'ing blocks on a fs root thats being > > dropped\n"); > > Please use btrfs_warn(), it makes sure we use a consistent message > style, identifies the fs, etc. > Also, "thats" should be "that is" or "that's". >
Ah yeah, I was following the other convention in there but we should probably convert all of those to btrfs_warn. I'll fix the grammer thing as well, just a leftover from the much less code of conduct friendly message I originally had there. Thanks, Josef
