Btrfs: don't clear uptodate if the eb is under IO

So I have an awful exercise script that will run snapshot, balance and
send/receive in parallel.  This sometimes would crash spectacularly and when it
came back up the fs would be completely hosed.  Turns out this is because of a
bad interaction of balance and send/receive.  Send will hold onto its entire
path for the whole send, but its blocks could get relocated out from underneath
it, and because it doesn't old tree locks theres nothing to keep this from
happening.  So it will go to read in a slot with an old transid, and we could
have re-allocated this block for something else and it could have a completely
different transid.  But because we think it is invalid we clear uptodate and
re-read in the block.  If we do this before we actually write out the new block
we could write back stale data to the fs, and boom we're screwed.

Now we definitely need to fix this disconnect between send and balance, but we
really really need to not allow ourselves to accidently read in stale data over
new data.  So make sure we check if the extent buffer is not under io before
clearing uptodate, this will kick back EIO to the caller instead of reading in
stale data and keep us from corrupting the fs.  Thanks,

Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>

1 files changed, 1 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent_io.h b/fs/btrfs/extent_io.h
index 58b27e5ab5215..c488b45237bf8 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/extent_io.h
+++ b/fs/btrfs/extent_io.h
@@ -320,6 +320,7 @@ int set_extent_buffer_dirty(struct extent_buffer *eb);
 int set_extent_buffer_uptodate(struct extent_buffer *eb);
 int clear_extent_buffer_uptodate(struct extent_buffer *eb);
 int extent_buffer_uptodate(struct extent_buffer *eb);
+int extent_buffer_under_io(struct extent_buffer *eb);
 int map_private_extent_buffer(struct extent_buffer *eb, unsigned long offset,
 		      unsigned long min_len, char **map,
 		      unsigned long *map_start,