Re: [PATCH 4/7] btrfs: qgroup: try to flush qgroup space when we get -EDQUOT

[Anand Jain]

On 13/08/2021 18:56, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 06:41:53PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
> > On 13/08/2021 18:39, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> > > On 2021/8/13 下午6:30, Anand Jain wrote:
> > > > On 13/08/2021 18:26, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> > > > > On 2021/8/13 下午5:55, Anand Jain wrote:
> > > > > > From: Qu Wenruo <wqu@xxxxxxxx>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > commit c53e9653605dbf708f5be02902de51831be4b009 upstream
> > > > >
> > > > > This lacks certain upstream fixes for it:
> > > > >
> > > > > f9baa501b4fd6962257853d46ddffbc21f27e344 btrfs: fix deadlock when
> > > > > cloning inline extents and using qgroups
> > > > >
> > > > > 4d14c5cde5c268a2bc26addecf09489cb953ef64 btrfs: don't flush from
> > > > > btrfs_delayed_inode_reserve_metadata
> > > > >
> > > > > 6f23277a49e68f8a9355385c846939ad0b1261e7 btrfs: qgroup: don't commit
> > > > > transaction when we already hold the handle
> > > > >
> > > > > All these fixes are to ensure we don't try to flush in context where we
> > > > > shouldn't.
> > > > >
> > > > > Without them, it can hit various deadlock.
> > > >
> > > > Qu,
> > > >
> > > >      Thanks for taking a look. I will send it in v2.
> > >
> > > I guess you only need to add the missing fixes?
> >
> >    Yeah, maybe it's better to send it as a new set.
>
> So should I drop the existing patches and wait for a whole new series,
> or will you send these as an additional set?

 Greg, I am sending it as an additional set.

> And at least one of the above commits needs to go to the 5.10.y tree, I
> did not check them all...

 I need to look into it.

Thanks, Anand

> thanks,
>
> greg k-h