Does this patch make sense? I noticed that in the extents version of the truncate, we call the mballoc-specific version of ext4_discard_reservation(), instead of ext4_discard_reservation() directly. As a result, if the filesystem is mounted -o nomballoc, we won't throw away the reservation window when truncating or unlinking an extents-based file. We are using ext4_discard_reservation() in non-extent truncate code, which is what made me notice this. - Ted ext4: Use ext4_discard_reservations instead of mballoc-specific call In ext4_ext_truncate(), we should use the more generic ext4_discard_reservations() call so we do the right thing when the filesystem is mounted with the nomballoc option. Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@xxxxxxx> diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents.c b/fs/ext4/extents.c index 3c82ab1..30a59b8 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/extents.c +++ b/fs/ext4/extents.c @@ -2963,7 +2963,7 @@ void ext4_ext_truncate(struct inode *inode) down_write(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_data_sem); ext4_ext_invalidate_cache(inode); - ext4_mb_discard_inode_preallocations(inode); + ext4_discard_reservation(inode); /* * TODO: optimization is possible here. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
