On Thu, 2022-04-07 at 22:41 +0800, xiubli@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> When truncating the file size the MDS will help update the last
> encrypted block, and during this we need to make sure the client
> won't fill the pagecaches.
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/ceph/inode.c | 7 ++++++-
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ceph/inode.c b/fs/ceph/inode.c
> index f4059d73edd5..cc1829ab497d 100644
> --- a/fs/ceph/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/ceph/inode.c
> @@ -2647,9 +2647,12 @@ int __ceph_setattr(struct inode *inode, struct iattr *attr, struct ceph_iattr *c
> req->r_num_caps = 1;
> req->r_stamp = attr->ia_ctime;
> if (fill_fscrypt) {
> + filemap_invalidate_lock(inode->i_mapping);
> err = fill_fscrypt_truncate(inode, req, attr);
> - if (err)
> + if (err) {
> + filemap_invalidate_unlock(inode->i_mapping);
> goto out;
> + }
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -2660,6 +2663,8 @@ int __ceph_setattr(struct inode *inode, struct iattr *attr, struct ceph_iattr *c
> * it.
> */
> err = ceph_mdsc_do_request(mdsc, NULL, req);
> + if (fill_fscrypt)
> + filemap_invalidate_unlock(inode->i_mapping);
> if (err == -EAGAIN && truncate_retry--) {
> dout("setattr %p result=%d (%s locally, %d remote), retry it!\n",
> inode, err, ceph_cap_string(dirtied), mask);
Looks reasonable. Is there any reason we shouldn't do this in the non-
encrypted case too? I suppose it doesn't make as much difference in that
case.
I'll plan to pull this and the other patch into the wip-fscrypt branch.
Should I just fold them into your earlier patches?
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
