From: Coly Li colyli@suse.de
[ Upstream commit 68d10e6979a3b59e3cd2e90bfcafed79c4cf180a ]
When failure happens inside bch_journal_replay(), calling cache_set_err_on() and handling the failure in async way is not a good idea. Because after bch_journal_replay() returns, registering code will continue to execute following steps, and unregistering code triggered by cache_set_err_on() is running in same time. First it is unnecessary to handle failure and unregister cache set in an async way, second there might be potential race condition to run register and unregister code for same cache set.
So in this patch, if failure happens in bch_journal_replay(), we don't call cache_set_err_on(), and just print out the same error message to kernel message buffer, then return -EIO immediately caller. Then caller can detect such failure and handle it in synchrnozied way.
Signed-off-by: Coly Li colyli@suse.de Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke hare@suse.com Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe axboe@kernel.dk Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin sashal@kernel.org --- drivers/md/bcache/journal.c | 9 ++++++--- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/md/bcache/journal.c b/drivers/md/bcache/journal.c index 03cc0722ae486..ec7856c06cbb0 100644 --- a/drivers/md/bcache/journal.c +++ b/drivers/md/bcache/journal.c @@ -323,9 +323,12 @@ int bch_journal_replay(struct cache_set *s, struct list_head *list) list_for_each_entry(i, list, list) { BUG_ON(i->pin && atomic_read(i->pin) != 1);
- cache_set_err_on(n != i->j.seq, s, -"bcache: journal entries %llu-%llu missing! (replaying %llu-%llu)", - n, i->j.seq - 1, start, end); + if (n != i->j.seq) { + pr_err("bcache: journal entries %llu-%llu missing! (replaying %llu-%llu)", + n, i->j.seq - 1, start, end); + ret = -EIO; + goto err; + }
for (k = i->j.start; k < bset_bkey_last(&i->j);