Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "end_trans".
2012 Jan 05
4
[RFC][PATCH 3/3] Btrfs: improve truncation of btrfs
...ed(page);
set_page_dirty(page);
+ i_size_write(inode, from);
unlock_extent_cached(io_tree, page_start, page_end, &cached_state,
GFP_NOFS);
@@ -3459,7 +3465,9 @@ static int btrfs_setsize(struct inode *inode, loff_t newsize)
ret = btrfs_update_inode(trans, root, inode);
btrfs_end_transaction_throttle(trans, root);
} else {
-
+ btrfs_wait_ordered_range(inode,
+ newsize & ~(root->sectorsize - 1),
+ (u64)-1);
/*
* We''re truncating a file that used to have good data down to
* zero. Make sure it gets into the ordered flush list so that
@@ -3469,...
2013 Jan 10
0
[PATCH 03/11] Btrfs: use atomic for fs_info->last_trans_log_full_commit
...trans,
goto end_no_trans;
}
- if (root->fs_info->last_trans_log_full_commit >
+ if (atomic64_read(&root->fs_info->last_trans_log_full_commit) >
atomic64_read(&root->fs_info->last_trans_committed)) {
ret = 1;
goto end_no_trans;
@@ -3819,7 +3824,8 @@ end_trans:
dput(old_parent);
if (ret < 0) {
WARN_ON(ret != -ENOSPC);
- root->fs_info->last_trans_log_full_commit = trans->transid;
+ atomic64_set(&root->fs_info->last_trans_log_full_commit,
+ trans->transid);
ret = 1;
}
btrfs_end_log_trans(root);
--
1.7.11.7
-...
2013 Jan 10
0
[PATCH 02/11] Btrfs: use atomic for fs_info->last_trans_committed
...rent(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
break;
if (BTRFS_I(inode)->generation >
- root->fs_info->last_trans_committed) {
+ atomic64_read(&root->fs_info->last_trans_committed)) {
ret = btrfs_log_inode(trans, root, inode, inode_only);
if (ret)
goto end_trans;
@@ -4063,9 +4065,9 @@ int btrfs_log_new_name(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
* from hasn''t been logged, we don''t need to log it
*/
if (BTRFS_I(inode)->logged_trans <=
- root->fs_info->last_trans_committed &&
+ atomic64_read(&root->fs_i...
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