Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "block_group_cache_lock".
2009 Jun 03
0
[PATCH] Make sure all dirty blocks are written at commit time
...+0800
+++ 2/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c 2009-06-03 10:52:58.000000000 +0800
@@ -2399,13 +2399,29 @@ fail:
}
+static struct btrfs_block_group_cache *
+next_block_group(struct btrfs_root *root,
+ struct btrfs_block_group_cache *cache)
+{
+ struct rb_node *node;
+ spin_lock(&root->fs_info->block_group_cache_lock);
+ node = rb_next(&cache->cache_node);
+ btrfs_put_block_group(cache);
+ if (node) {
+ cache = rb_entry(node, struct btrfs_block_group_cache,
+ cache_node);
+ atomic_inc(&cache->count);
+ } else
+ cache = NULL;
+ spin_unlock(&root->fs_info->block_group_cache_lock);
+...
2008 Oct 10
1
[PATCH] fix enospc when there is plenty of space
...;space_info->lock);
+ down_write(&block_group->space_info->groups_sem);
list_del(&block_group->list);
- spin_unlock(&block_group->space_info->lock);
+ up_write(&block_group->space_info->groups_sem);
kfree(block_group);
}
spin_unlock(&info->block_group_cache_lock);
@@ -5142,9 +5082,9 @@ int btrfs_read_block_groups(struct btrfs_root *root)
&space_info);
BUG_ON(ret);
cache->space_info = space_info;
- spin_lock(&space_info->lock);
- list_add(&cache->list, &space_info->block_groups);
- spin_unlock(&space_info->l...
2012 Apr 20
44
Ceph on btrfs 3.4rc
After running ceph on XFS for some time, I decided to try btrfs again.
Performance with the current "for-linux-min" branch and big metadata
is much better. The only problem (?) I''m still seeing is a warning
that seems to occur from time to time:
[87703.784552] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[87703.789759] WARNING: at fs/btrfs/inode.c:2103