Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 12 Oct 2022 14:56:48 +0200
From:   David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
To:     Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org,
        Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>, David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>,
        clm@fb.com, josef@toxicpanda.com, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.0 38/46] btrfs: introduce
 BTRFS_QGROUP_RUNTIME_FLAG_CANCEL_RESCAN
Message-ID: <20221012125648.GX13389@suse.cz>
Reply-To: dsterba@suse.cz
References: <20221011145015.1622882-1-sashal@kernel.org>
 <20221011145015.1622882-38-sashal@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20221011145015.1622882-38-sashal@kernel.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23.1-rc1 (2014-03-12)
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 10:50:06AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> From: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
> 
> [ Upstream commit e562a8bdf652b010ce2525bcf15d145c9d3932bf ]
> 
> Introduce a new runtime flag, BTRFS_QGROUP_RUNTIME_FLAG_CANCEL_RESCAN,
> which will inform qgroup rescan to cancel its work asynchronously.
> 
> This is to address the window when an operation makes qgroup numbers
> inconsistent (like qgroup inheriting) while a qgroup rescan is running.
> 
> In that case, qgroup inconsistent flag will be cleared when qgroup
> rescan finishes.
> But we changed the ownership of some extents, which means the rescan is
> already meaningless, and the qgroup inconsistent flag should not be
> cleared.
> 
> With the new flag, each time we set INCONSISTENT flag, we also set this
> new flag to inform any running qgroup rescan to exit immediately, and
> leaving the INCONSISTENT flag there.
> 
> The new runtime flag can only be cleared when a new rescan is started.

Qu, does this patch make sense for stable on itself? It was part of a
series adding some new flags and the sysfs knob.  As I read it there's a
case where it can affect how the rescan is done and that it can be
cancelled but still am not sure if it's worth the backport.