Joel Becker wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 10:44:35AM +0800, Tao Ma wrote:
>> Joel Becker wrote:
>>> @@ -3128,7 +3145,7 @@ static int ocfs2_half_xattr_bucket(struct inode
>>> *inode,
>>> int ret, i;
>>> u16 count, start, len, name_value_len, xe_len, name_offset;
>>> u16 blk_per_bucket = ocfs2_blocks_per_xattr_bucket(inode->i_sb);
>>> - struct buffer_head **s_bhs, **t_bhs = NULL;
>>> + struct ocfs2_xattr_bucket s_bucket, t_bucket;
>>> struct ocfs2_xattr_header *xh;
>>> struct ocfs2_xattr_entry *xe;
>>> int blocksize = inode->i_sb->s_blocksize;
>> snip
>>> - t_bhs = kcalloc(blk_per_bucket, sizeof(struct buffer_head *), GFP_NOFS);
>>> - if (!t_bhs) {
>>> - ret = -ENOMEM;
>>> - goto out;
>>> - }
>>> -
>>> - ret = ocfs2_read_xattr_bucket(inode, new_blk, t_bhs, new_bucket_head);
>>> + /*
>>> + * Even if !new_bucket_head, we're overwriting t_bucket. Thus,
>>> + * there's no need to read it.
>>> + */
>>> + ret = ocfs2_init_xattr_bucket(inode, &t_bucket, new_blk);
>>> if (ret) {
>>> mlog_errno(ret);
>>> goto out;
>>> }
>>> for (i = 0; i < blk_per_bucket; i++) {
>>> - ret = ocfs2_journal_access(handle, inode, t_bhs[i],
>>> + ret = ocfs2_journal_access(handle, inode, t_bucket.bu_bhs[i],
>>> new_bucket_head ?
>>> OCFS2_JOURNAL_ACCESS_CREATE :
>>> OCFS2_JOURNAL_ACCESS_WRITE);
>> I have read the caller of ocfs2_half_xattr_bucket again. In
>> ocfs2_extend_xattr_bucket when we want to half the bucket to a never-used
>> new bucket within the same cluster(while we always pass new_bucket_head=0),
>> do we need to use OCFS2_JOURNAL_ACCESS_CREATE? If yes, maybe we have to
>> modify the caller to be more precisely(I can handle this based on your
>> patch set). The same goes for ocfs2_cp_xattr_bucket.
>
> Mark and I were discussing this on #ocfs2 just today. We were
> having a hard time understanding the condition of the bucket - what
> new_bucket_head really means. This comes from my patch to set the
> JOURNAL_ACCESS based on the new_bucket_head value (same in
> cp_xattr_bucket).
> Is the target bucket (t_bucket) always in the same cluster for
> all callers regardless of new_bucket_head? Has it ever been written
> before? May it have been allocated a long time ago?
I have read your discussion about it. :) The situation is a little
complicated here. Sometimes in ocfs2_half_xattr_bucket t_bucket is never
used before while sometimes it isn't.
Anyway, I will generate a patch for it later after you push this patch
set, so that you can see what I mean and sob or NAK It.
Regards,
Tao
>
> Joel
>
_______________________________________________
Ocfs2-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-devel
