On 6:50 10/04, Anand Jain wrote:
> On 09/04/2021 23:56, Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote:
> > check_running_fs_exclop() can return 1 when exclop is changed to "none"
> > The ret is set by the return value of the select() operation. Checking
> > the exclusive op changes just the exclop variable while ret is still
> > set to 1.
> >
> > Set ret exclusively if exclop is set to BTRFS_EXCL_NONE.
> > ---
>
> SOB missing.
Yes, missed that.
>
> > common/utils.c | 2 ++
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/common/utils.c b/common/utils.c
> > index 57e41432..2e5175c3 100644
> > --- a/common/utils.c
> > +++ b/common/utils.c
> > @@ -2326,6 +2326,8 @@ int check_running_fs_exclop(int fd, enum
> > exclusive_operation start, bool enqueue
> > tv.tv_sec /= 2;
> > ret = select(sysfs_fd + 1, NULL, NULL, &fds, &tv);
> > exclop = get_fs_exclop(fd);
> > + if (exclop == BTRFS_EXCL_NONE)
> > + ret = 0;
> > continue;
> > }
> > }
> >
>
>
> This is bit inconsistent from what is done a few lines above:
>
> exclop = get_fs_exclop(fd);
> if (exclop <= 0) {
> ret = 0;
> goto out;
> }
>
> We return 0 for both BTRFS_EXCLOP_NONE || BTRFS_EXCLOP_UNKNOWN.
>
I am not sure why we are translating the sysfs file value to enums. The
only status we are concerned about is with "none", anything besides that
is considered to be busy, for code flow purposes. For error display, we
can print whatever the sysfs file contains. Was this done for i18n?
Of course, to maintain backward compatibility, we need to check on
existence of the file.
Anyways, I will re-post this patch with what is done a few lines above.
--
Goldwyn
