From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 090D3C55181 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 08:04:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB4642071C for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 08:04:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="Qea8LJqW" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726741AbgDUIEz (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Apr 2020 04:04:55 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:45606 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726052AbgDUIEx (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Apr 2020 04:04:53 -0400 Received: from mail-vk1-xa41.google.com (mail-vk1-xa41.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::a41]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A002BC061A0F for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 01:04:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vk1-xa41.google.com with SMTP id n128so3365814vke.5 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 01:04:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:reply-to:from:date:message-id :subject:to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=lW1NQBCOz+WmCLpluHP2UT+B6fMQD2yLPJaqz2YNlns=; b=Qea8LJqWI1+VF+cT1AXyXf1x8zZsyii5qWdHnf5ZTPRWyYMUH1se3ks6b/HIDqPLn6 5s2q6opUm2z/skRLoCCgcKlTNxpTd0uepQ4tFxmlLhk8gg9zt8Fhf1uIakkVY6mVvTpl uVUpkqGtQn0YWXEOn9sGmeBaaEZlEBhH9JD3L4eTOcHDzIB4gXWyq8rXhB0mS5Tr0IFW fnNhKzA2Aym8ywOf+O1p/RDINPvDsNzUNZLaOI48g8qevMDBQ+1vOHEqxDUA5/nTOue6 kbw4cJ+2xaOj/sT7zsi/GTCROTB40qAPxl1TBCS04/WVGH1mGttsYmMhQWWpDzo86L3W w6kQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:reply-to :from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=lW1NQBCOz+WmCLpluHP2UT+B6fMQD2yLPJaqz2YNlns=; b=nctI3YKw1C4MieILPjJVQDAI/7ohfjiI7EbwdQpRocxNrCBoqORkRnFXF8O/hJabnT 5ptid+SVHWEjfCmmhSrEzpBCDaGus33TNYLmyR9bWGyf7vM1kMQ4C2gD+BTvvFZ0rdEM 5qV2kMvnwUUJ9C8hezE3BmFxddM4qDcv6y8oEXmVxWOYvvmU3rWPRy+VhoYWFXtUfjqq rPesxOKIoc6lIeymb9LPl1x7dqLE5SOrThRrT60CuSpXs6dja6LioWte4tIB0T5PUZVq sroEdKW+pVlnV8C27Y5TlqMOdjinw4lfdoM8bZD/oyA7k/BYDL0xlMQRD4aS5zrVh0rj M6/w== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuYX8xGOUwHTib6qO5gBvOOLZaTVOsf+CJtD9kGedI4sOkVLVbnD rEDlnXJiWVydb4yB4j2PMSvRkvC+LPxj9d+3YEU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypI359pP9fu5bPFMr8YDMrRahHM8Da+hUaql37LAgxHYiPptvjM8wemi1QcTAB6znAwlk8JntPwmnAqdX2FeWAA= X-Received: by 2002:a1f:d145:: with SMTP id i66mr13714593vkg.24.1587456292817; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 01:04:52 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200410154248.2646406-1-josef@toxicpanda.com> <20200420232016.GL18421@twin.jikos.cz> In-Reply-To: <20200420232016.GL18421@twin.jikos.cz> Reply-To: fdmanana@gmail.com From: Filipe Manana Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 09:04:41 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] btrfs: fix setting last_trans for reloc roots To: dsterba@suse.cz, Johannes Thumshirn , Josef Bacik , "linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" , "kernel-team@fb.com" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 12:22 AM David Sterba 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 > > > > > > > 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. --=20 Filipe David Manana, =E2=80=9CWhether you think you can, or you think you can't =E2=80=94 you're= right.=E2=80=9D