On 06/17/2014 11:55 AM, Marc MERLIN wrote:
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 11:29:57AM -0700, Josef Bacik wrote:
I'm sure that filesystem is damaged in some way, but the kernel of course
should not crash.
I don't have this mail client setup right to send patches, can you just
go into relocation.c in build_backref_tree and remove the need_check =
false; statement and see if that fixes it. Thanks,
Sure, I'll try that tomorrow when I have access to that machine.
Just to be clear
1) You mean this one, right?
if (!upper->checked && need_check) {
need_check = false; <-- delete this
list_add_tail(&edge->list[UPPER],
&list);
} else
Yup that one.
2) is your guess that the BUG_ON I'm getting shouldn't be triggered
and your proposed patch could fix that, or that I do have an FS problem
but that we're just going to make the kernel more lenient and not crash on it?
All of these BUG_ON(!uppper->checked) are logic errors, not problems
with the fs, which is why I haven't turned them into an abort or
something else yet. I'm thinking about chucking this whole function
anyway and using the backref walking code, but that is going to be a job
for future josef, present josef doesn't seem to have any time to do
anything despite sleeping a lot less. 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
