On Thu 26-12-19 12:17:31, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 08:28:23PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > > > However depending on which patch lands first one may need a > > > re-basing. Will conflict with this- > > > https://marc.info/?l=linux-ext4&m=157613016931238&w=2 > > > > Yes, but the conflict is minor and trivial to resolve. > > > > Is this the correct resolution? Looks good to me as well. Honza > > --- a/fs/ext4/file.c > +++ b/fs/ext4/file.c > @@ -447,6 +447,7 @@ static ssize_t ext4_dio_write_iter(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *from) > struct inode *inode = file_inode(iocb->ki_filp); > loff_t offset = iocb->ki_pos; > size_t count = iov_iter_count(from); > + const struct iomap_ops *iomap_ops = &ext4_iomap_ops; > bool extend = false, unaligned_io = false; > bool ilock_shared = true; > > @@ -526,7 +527,9 @@ static ssize_t ext4_dio_write_iter(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *from) > ext4_journal_stop(handle); > } > > - ret = iomap_dio_rw(iocb, from, &ext4_iomap_ops, &ext4_dio_write_ops, > + if (ilock_shared) > + iomap_ops = &ext4_iomap_overwrite_ops; > + ret = iomap_dio_rw(iocb, from, iomap_ops, &ext4_dio_write_ops, > is_sync_kiocb(iocb) || unaligned_io || extend); > > if (extend) > > - Ted > -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR
