Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] btrfs: split btrfs_insert_delayed_dir_index() into prealloc and commit phases
Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-btrfs,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Wed, 2026-08-05 at 08:44 +0930, 'Qu Wenruo' via Kernel Team wrote: > > 在 2026/8/5 01:14, Jeff Layton 写道: > > Split btrfs_insert_delayed_dir_index() into three functions using a new > > btrfs_dir_index_prealloc struct to bundle the pre-allocated resources: > > > > - btrfs_prealloc_delayed_dir_index(): performs the two GFP_NOFS > > allocations (delayed node + delayed item) that can fail with -ENOMEM. > > - btrfs_insert_delayed_dir_index_prealloc(): populates the item data, > > inserts into the rb-tree, and reserves metadata space. Cannot fail > > with -ENOMEM since all allocations were done in the prealloc step. > > - btrfs_free_delayed_dir_index_prealloc(): frees pre-allocated > > resources when the caller's btree insertion fails. > > > > The original btrfs_insert_delayed_dir_index() is refactored into a thin > > wrapper that calls the prealloc and commit functions. > > > > This split allows callers to move the fallible memory allocations before > > the point of no return (the DIR_ITEM btree insertion), so that -ENOMEM > > can be returned cleanly without aborting the transaction. > > > > Assisted-by: LLM > > Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <[email protected]> > > --- > > fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c | 111 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- > > fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.h | 17 ++++++++ > > 2 files changed, 104 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c b/fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c > > index db2ffab0941a..95d2dca80444 100644 > > --- a/fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c > > +++ b/fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c > > @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ > > > > #include <linux/slab.h> > > #include <linux/iversion.h> > > +#include <linux/error-injection.h> > > #include "ctree.h" > > #include "fs.h" > > #include "messages.h" > > @@ -1469,35 +1470,74 @@ static void btrfs_release_dir_index_item_space(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans) > > trans->bytes_reserved -= bytes; > > } > > > > -/* Will return 0, -ENOMEM or -EEXIST (index number collision, unexpected). */ > > -int btrfs_insert_delayed_dir_index(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, > > - const char *name, int name_len, > > - struct btrfs_inode *dir, > > - const struct btrfs_disk_key *disk_key, u8 flags, > > - u64 index) > > +/* > > + * Pre-allocate a delayed node and delayed item for a dir index insertion. > > + * Call this before modifying the btree so that ENOMEM can be returned > > + * before any on-disk state has changed. > > + * > > + * Returns 0 on success, -ENOMEM on allocation failure. > > + */ > > +int btrfs_prealloc_delayed_dir_index(struct btrfs_inode *dir, > > + const char *name, int name_len, > > + struct btrfs_dir_index_prealloc *prealloc) > > We can directly return a btrfs_dir_index_prealloc pointer, which reduce > the parameter list. > ...but then we'd have to allocate it separately. It's currently allocated on the stack by the caller. I think we ought to keep it this way, but I'm willing to be convinced otherwise. > Otherwise looks good to me. > > Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo <[email protected]> > -- Jeff Layton <[email protected]>