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

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

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@suse.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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
>