On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 02:09:54PM +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> On 08/17/2009 09:42 AM, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 04:16:26PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >> On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 08:25:38PM +1000, npiggin@xxxxxxx wrote:
> >>> @@ -66,9 +68,10 @@ void ext2_delete_inode (struct inode * i
> >>> mark_inode_dirty(inode);
> >>> ext2_write_inode(inode, inode_needs_sync(inode));
> >>>
> >>> + /* XXX: where is truncate_inode_pages? */
> >>> inode->i_size = 0;
> >>> if (inode->i_blocks)
> >>> - ext2_truncate (inode);
> >>> + ext2_truncate_blocks(inode, 0);
> >>> ext2_free_inode (inode);
> >>
> >> At the beginning of the function, just before the diff window. Because
> >> this is ->delete_inode we truncate away all pages, down to offset 0.
> >
> > OK, weird. I thought I couldn't see it when I wrote that :) maybe my
> > tree was corrupted or I'm stupid.
> >
> >
> >>> +static void ext2_truncate_blocks(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset)
> >>> +{
> >>> + /*
> >>> + * XXX: it seems like a bug here that we don't allow
> >>> + * IS_APPEND inode to have blocks-past-i_size trimmed off.
> >>> + * review and fix this.
> >>> + */
> >>> + if (!(S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) || S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode) ||
> >>> + S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode)))
> >>> + return -EINVAL;
> >>> + if (ext2_inode_is_fast_symlink(inode))
> >>> + return -EINVAL;
> >>> + if (IS_APPEND(inode) || IS_IMMUTABLE(inode))
> >>> + return -EPERM;
> >>> + __ext2_truncate_blocks(inode, offset);
> >>
> >> Yes, I think the IS_APPEND(inode) || IS_IMMUTABLE(inode) checks should move
> >> into ext2_setsize. But let's leave that for a separate patch.
> >
> > Yeah agreed.
> >
> >
> >> Btw, the above code gives me warnings like this:
> >>
> >> /home/hch/work/linux-2.6/fs/ext2/inode.c: In function
> >> 'ext2_truncate_blocks':
> >> /home/hch/work/linux-2.6/fs/ext2/inode.c:1158: warning: 'return' with a
> >> value, in function returning void
> >> /home/hch/work/linux-2.6/fs/ext2/inode.c:1160: warning: 'return' with a
> >> value, in function returning void
> >> /home/hch/work/linux-2.6/fs/ext2/inode.c:1162: warning: 'return' with a
> >> value, in function returning void
> >>
> >> because you try to return errors from a function delcared as void.
> >
> > Hm, sorry. I thought it was in good shape... I'll recheck that I sent
> > out the correct versions and resend according to feedback from you
> > and Hugh.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nick
> >
>
> Nick do you have a public tree with these latest patches? I would like to
> try out an exofs conversion and testing.
Hi Boaz,
I don't have a public tree. I can send you a rollup if you ping me or
just take the patches from the list. I will send out a new set shortly
(with very minor differences -- a couple of new helper functions to
use).
That will be great if you can convert your fs. I will really appreciate
it.
Thanks,
Nick
--
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
