Re: [PATCH] btrfs: fix setting last_trans for reloc roots

[Filipe Manana <fdmanana@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 12:22 AM David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 03:34:30PM +0000, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> > On 16/04/2020 14:38, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> > > This fixes a kmemleak complaint from btrfs/074, complete re-run of
> > > xfstests is pending, but one down again.
> > >
> > > Tested-by: Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com>
> > >
> >
> > I'll take that back, I still see a leak of 'cur_trans' allocated in
> > join_transaction() for btrfs/074 on a full xfstests run. The same leak
> > is reported for btrfs/072 and generic/127.
>
> I'm not sure, but the patch "btrfs: drop logs when we've aborted a
> transaction" is fixing transaction handle leaks. I've added it to
> misc-next, the effects have been observed in test generic/475 so it's
> only a weak link, tests btrfs/074 do not stress the transaction cleanup
> that much.

Hum?
That patch fixes a use-after-crash during unmount after a transaction
was aborted - it doesn't fix transaction leaks as far as I can see.
Perhaps you meant patch "btrfs: fix memory leak of transaction when
deleting unused block group", which fixes a regression introduced in
5.7-rc1.
btrfs/074 (and tests 060 to 073) often triggers unused block group
deletion due to fsstress and other operations in parallel.



-- 
Filipe David Manana,

“Whether you think you can, or you think you can't — you're right.”