Tsutomu Itoh
2012-Sep-12 08:26 UTC
[PATCH] Btrfs: cleanup of error processing in btree_get_extent()
This patch simplifies a little complex error processing in
btree_get_extent().
Signed-off-by: Tsutomu Itoh <t-itoh@jp.fujitsu.com>
---
fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 14 +++++---------
1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
index 29c69e6..27d0ebe 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
@@ -222,21 +222,17 @@ static struct extent_map *btree_get_extent(struct inode
*inode,
free_extent_map(em);
em = lookup_extent_mapping(em_tree, start, len);
- if (em) {
- ret = 0;
- } else {
- em = lookup_extent_mapping(em_tree, failed_start,
- failed_len);
- ret = -EIO;
+ if (!em) {
+ lookup_extent_mapping(em_tree, failed_start,
+ failed_len);
+ em = ERR_PTR(-EIO);
}
} else if (ret) {
free_extent_map(em);
- em = NULL;
+ em = ERR_PTR(ret);
}
write_unlock(&em_tree->lock);
- if (ret)
- em = ERR_PTR(ret);
out:
return em;
}
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs"
in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Stefan Behrens
2012-Sep-12 10:37 UTC
Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: cleanup of error processing in btree_get_extent()
On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 17:26:43 +0900, Tsutomu Itoh wrote:> This patch simplifies a little complex error processing in > btree_get_extent(). > > Signed-off-by: Tsutomu Itoh <t-itoh@jp.fujitsu.com> > --- > fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 14 +++++--------- > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c > index 29c69e6..27d0ebe 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c > @@ -222,21 +222,17 @@ static struct extent_map *btree_get_extent(struct inode *inode, > > free_extent_map(em); > em = lookup_extent_mapping(em_tree, start, len); > - if (em) { > - ret = 0; > - } else { > - em = lookup_extent_mapping(em_tree, failed_start, > - failed_len); > - ret = -EIO; > + if (!em) { > + lookup_extent_mapping(em_tree, failed_start, > + failed_len); > + em = ERR_PTR(-EIO);The patch itself looks good and doesn''t change the behavior while it simplifies the code. But I think that it identifies an old error in the code. It is eye-catching the the return value of lookup_extent_mapping() is not used. Therefore the call can either be removed or it has side-effects which are required. lookup_extent_mapping() has the side-effect to increment the extent map''s ref count that it returns. I cannot believe that this incremented ref count is correct when the extent map itself is not used. IMO, either the EIO and ignoring the returned extent map is wrong, or the incremented ref count is wrong.> } > } else if (ret) { > free_extent_map(em); > - em = NULL; > + em = ERR_PTR(ret); > } > write_unlock(&em_tree->lock); > > - if (ret) > - em = ERR_PTR(ret); > out: > return em; > }-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Tsutomu Itoh
2012-Sep-13 01:08 UTC
Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: cleanup of error processing in btree_get_extent()
Hi, Stefan, (2012/09/12 19:37), Stefan Behrens wrote:> On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 17:26:43 +0900, Tsutomu Itoh wrote: >> This patch simplifies a little complex error processing in >> btree_get_extent(). >> >> Signed-off-by: Tsutomu Itoh <t-itoh@jp.fujitsu.com> >> --- >> fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 14 +++++--------- >> 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c >> index 29c69e6..27d0ebe 100644 >> --- a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c >> +++ b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c >> @@ -222,21 +222,17 @@ static struct extent_map *btree_get_extent(struct inode *inode, >> >> free_extent_map(em); >> em = lookup_extent_mapping(em_tree, start, len); >> - if (em) { >> - ret = 0; >> - } else { >> - em = lookup_extent_mapping(em_tree, failed_start, >> - failed_len); >> - ret = -EIO; >> + if (!em) { >> + lookup_extent_mapping(em_tree, failed_start, >> + failed_len); >> + em = ERR_PTR(-EIO); > > The patch itself looks good and doesn''t change the behavior while it > simplifies the code. But I think that it identifies an old error in the > code. It is eye-catching the the return value of lookup_extent_mapping() > is not used. Therefore the call can either be removed or it has > side-effects which are required. lookup_extent_mapping() has the > side-effect to increment the extent map''s ref count that it returns. I > cannot believe that this incremented ref count is correct when the > extent map itself is not used. IMO, either the EIO and ignoring the > returned extent map is wrong, or the incremented ref count is wrong.Thank you for your review. I think lookup_extent_mapping() using failed_start is not needed. So, I will remake my patch later. Thanks, Tsutomu> >> } >> } else if (ret) { >> free_extent_map(em); >> - em = NULL; >> + em = ERR_PTR(ret); >> } >> write_unlock(&em_tree->lock); >> >> - if (ret) >> - em = ERR_PTR(ret); >> out: >> return em; >> } > > >-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html