On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 10:14:13AM -0500, Phillip Susi wrote: > On 12/14/2011 9:58 AM, Josef Bacik wrote: > >There is no "underlying bug", there is a shitty situation, the shitty > >situation > > Maybe my assumptions are wrong somewhere then. You add the orphan > item to make sure that the truncate will be finalized even if the > system crashes before the transaction commits right? So if > truncate() fails with -ENOSPC, then you shouldn't be trying to > finalize the truncate on the next mount, should you ( because the > call did not succeed )? >
Yes because otherwise we'll leak space since the i_size has been updated already. The other option is to make btrfs_truncate_inode_items update i_size as we truncate so if it fails we can delete the orphan item and then update the inode with the new i_size, that way we don't leave the orphan item on disk and we don't leak space. I'll see how doable this is. Thanks, Josef -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
