From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Subject: Re: [PATCH 36/49] ext4: Add EXT4_IOC_MIGRATE ioctl Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 14:12:47 +0530 Message-ID: <20080126084247.GA6778@skywalker> References: <1200970948-17903-31-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <1200970948-17903-32-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <1200970948-17903-33-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <1200970948-17903-34-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <1200970948-17903-35-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <1200970948-17903-36-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <1200970948-17903-37-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <20080123140716.e6f5d14f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080124055532.GC7902@skywalker> <20080126041500.GA28889@mit.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii To: Theodore Tso , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org" Return-path: Received: from E23SMTP03.au.ibm.com ([202.81.18.172]:45608 "EHLO e23smtp03.au.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751869AbYAZIm7 (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jan 2008 03:42:59 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080126041500.GA28889@mit.edu> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 11:15:00PM -0500, Theodore Tso wrote: > On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 11:25:32AM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > > +static int free_ext_idx(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode, > > + struct ext4_extent_idx *ix) > > +{ > > + int i, retval = 0; > > + ext4_fsblk_t block; > > + struct buffer_head *bh; > > + struct ext4_extent_header *eh; > > + > > + block = idx_pblock(ix); > > + bh = sb_bread(inode->i_sb, block); > > + if (!bh) > > + return -EIO; > > + > > + eh = (struct ext4_extent_header *)bh->b_data; > > + if (eh->eh_depth == 0) { > > + brelse(bh); > > + ext4_free_blocks(handle, inode, block, 1); > > + } else { > > + ix = EXT_FIRST_INDEX(eh); > > + for (i = 0; i < le16_to_cpu(eh->eh_entries); i++, ix++) { > > + retval = free_ext_idx(handle, inode, ix); > > + if (retval) > > + return retval; > > + } > > + } > > + return retval; > > +} > > Aneesh, looks like if eh->eh_depth is != 0, bh gets leaked. This is > how I plan to fix it up: > > +static int free_ext_idx(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode, > + struct ext4_extent_idx *ix) > +{ > + int i, retval = 0; > + ext4_fsblk_t block; > + struct buffer_head *bh; > + struct ext4_extent_header *eh; > + > + block = idx_pblock(ix); > + bh = sb_bread(inode->i_sb, block); > + if (!bh) > + return -EIO; > + > + eh = (struct ext4_extent_header *)bh->b_data; > + if (eh->eh_depth == 0) > + ext4_free_blocks(handle, inode, block, 1); > + else { > + ix = EXT_FIRST_INDEX(eh); > + for (i = 0; i < le16_to_cpu(eh->eh_entries); i++, ix++) { > + retval = free_ext_idx(handle, inode, ix); > + if (retval) > + break; > + } > + } > + put_bh(bh); We need to mark the index block as free. via ext4_free_blocks(handle, inode, block, 1); I remember making this change. May be it was related to dind/tind blocks. -aneesh