Yeah, it did not hurt. but it may output checksum mismatch. For example: Writing 4k superblock is not totally finished, but we are trying to scrub it.
Thanks, Wang 2013/10/19, Stefan Behrens <[email protected]>: > On 10/19/2013 06:17, Wang Shilong wrote: >> From: Wang Shilong <[email protected]> >> >> Scrubing supers is not in a transaction context, when trying to >> write supers to disk, we should check if we are trying to >> scrub supers.Fix it. >> >> Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong <[email protected]> >> --- >> fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 2 ++ >> fs/btrfs/transaction.c | 2 ++ >> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c >> index 419968e..0debb19 100644 >> --- a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c >> +++ b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c >> @@ -3582,7 +3582,9 @@ int btrfs_commit_super(struct btrfs_root *root) >> return ret; >> } >> >> + btrfs_scrub_pause_super(root); >> ret = write_ctree_super(NULL, root, 0); >> + btrfs_scrub_continue_super(root); >> return ret; >> } >> >> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/transaction.c b/fs/btrfs/transaction.c >> index 277fe81..3ebcbbd 100644 >> --- a/fs/btrfs/transaction.c >> +++ b/fs/btrfs/transaction.c >> @@ -1892,7 +1892,9 @@ int btrfs_commit_transaction(struct >> btrfs_trans_handle *trans, >> goto cleanup_transaction; >> } >> >> + btrfs_scrub_pause_super(root); >> ret = write_ctree_super(trans, root, 0); >> + btrfs_scrub_continue_super(root); >> if (ret) { >> mutex_unlock(&root->fs_info->tree_log_mutex); >> goto cleanup_transaction; >> > > What kind of race do you see between writing the 4K superblock and scrub > checking its checksum? Or in other words, what could happen? > > > -- 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
