Re: [RFC PATCH] btrfs: remove struct scrub_stx for superblock scrubbing

[Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com>]

On 23/03/2023 09:13, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2023/3/21 18:11, Anand Jain wrote:
>> On 3/21/23 15:26, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2023/3/21 13:23, Anand Jain wrote:
>>>> Following the patchset that implements reader-friendly scrub code
>>>> made the struct scrub_stx is no longer required for scrubbing 
>>>> superblocks.
>>>>
>>>>    btrfs: scrub: use a more reader friendly code to implement 
>>>> scrub_simple_mirror()
>>>>
>>>> Therefore, scrub_ctx does not need to be passed as a parameter,
>>>> (unless there are other plans for it).
>>>>
>>>> This patch cleans up the code and is built on top of the above 
>>>> patchset.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com>
>>>
>>> Looks good, if you're fine I can fold this into the offending patch 
>>> in the next update.
>>>
>>
>> IMO, this patch is a cleanup rather than a bug fix, so there
>> isn't offending patch. If it is folded to the patch 1/12, it
>> may be too many objectives in one patch.
> 
> The cleanup is only possible because of the patch "btrfs: scrub: use 
> dedicated super block verification function to scrub one super block".
> 
> As the old code relies on the scrub_sectors() function, thus needing the 
> @sctx parameter.
> 
> And it's indeed my fault not fully cleaning up the parameters.
> 


> Thus I believe it's better to fold it into the mentioned patch.

  Yes. Please go ahead.

Thanks, Anand


> Thanks,
> Qu
>>
>> Nonetheless, I have no objections if you still decide to fold it.
>>
>> Thanks, Anand
>>
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Qu
>>>
>>>> ---
>>>>   fs/btrfs/scrub.c | 15 +++++++--------
>>>>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/scrub.c b/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
>>>> index beccf763ae64..bc87277559d3 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
>>>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/scrub.c
>>>> @@ -4909,12 +4909,12 @@ int scrub_enumerate_chunks(struct scrub_ctx 
>>>> *sctx,
>>>>       return ret;
>>>>   }
>>>> -static int scrub_one_super(struct scrub_ctx *sctx, struct 
>>>> btrfs_device *dev,
>>>> -               struct page *page, u64 physical, u64 generation)
>>>> +static int scrub_one_super(struct btrfs_device *dev, struct page 
>>>> *page,
>>>> +               u64 physical, u64 generation)
>>>>   {
>>>> -    struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info = sctx->fs_info;
>>>>       struct bio_vec bvec;
>>>>       struct bio bio;
>>>> +    struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info = dev->fs_info;
>>>>       struct btrfs_super_block *sb = page_address(page);
>>>>       int ret;
>>>> @@ -4945,15 +4945,14 @@ static int scrub_one_super(struct scrub_ctx 
>>>> *sctx, struct btrfs_device *dev,
>>>>       return ret;
>>>>   }
>>>> -static noinline_for_stack int scrub_supers(struct scrub_ctx *sctx,
>>>> -                       struct btrfs_device *scrub_dev)
>>>> +static noinline_for_stack int scrub_supers(struct btrfs_device 
>>>> *scrub_dev)
>>>>   {
>>>>       int    i;
>>>>       u64    bytenr;
>>>>       u64    gen;
>>>>       int    ret = 0;
>>>>       struct page *page;
>>>> -    struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info = sctx->fs_info;
>>>> +    struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info = scrub_dev->fs_info;
>>>>       if (BTRFS_FS_ERROR(fs_info))
>>>>           return -EROFS;
>>>> @@ -4976,7 +4975,7 @@ static noinline_for_stack int 
>>>> scrub_supers(struct scrub_ctx *sctx,
>>>>           if (!btrfs_check_super_location(scrub_dev, bytenr))
>>>>               continue;
>>>> -        ret = scrub_one_super(sctx, scrub_dev, page, bytenr, gen);
>>>> +        ret = scrub_one_super(scrub_dev, page, bytenr, gen);
>>>>           if (ret)
>>>>               break;
>>>>       }
>>>> @@ -5172,7 +5171,7 @@ int btrfs_scrub_dev(struct btrfs_fs_info 
>>>> *fs_info, u64 devid, u64 start,
>>>>            * kick off writing super in log tree sync.
>>>>            */
>>>>           mutex_lock(&fs_info->fs_devices->device_list_mutex);
>>>> -        ret = scrub_supers(sctx, dev);
>>>> +        ret = scrub_supers(dev);
>>>>           mutex_unlock(&fs_info->fs_devices->device_list_mutex);
>>>>           spin_lock(&sctx->stat_lock);
>>