Re: [PATCH] btrfs: fix inconsistency during missing device rejoin

["Misono, Tomohiro" <misono.tomohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>]

On 2017/12/04 16:19, Anand Jain wrote:
> When device is missing its not necessary that btrfs_device::name is null
> or the path is different when it reappears. Its possible that device can
> go missing after its been scanned where neither of
> btrfs_device::name == NULL OR btrfs_device::name != reappear_dev_path,
> is true. So just check for btrfs_device::dev_state.missing. Thanks.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com>
> ---
>  fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
> index 59a8785a2e9e..ac0c4eb5107f 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
> @@ -715,7 +715,8 @@ static noinline int device_list_add(const char *path,
>  
>  		ret = 1;
>  		device->fs_devices = fs_devices;
> -	} else if (!device->name || strcmp(device->name->str, path)) {
> +	} else if (!device->name || strcmp(device->name->str, path) ||
> +			test_bit(BTRFS_DEV_STATE_MISSING, &device->dev_state)) {
>  		/*
>  		 * When FS is already mounted.
>  		 * 1. If you are here and if the device->name is NULL that
> 

I read the comments below this and wonder if BTRFS_DEV_STATE_MISSING is set 
when device->name is null and therefore the first condition can be removed.

Thanks,
Tomohiro