On Wed 26-02-20 15:27:06, Ritesh Harjani wrote: > For indirect block mapping if the i_block > max supported block in inode > then ext4_ind_map_blocks may return a -EIO error. But in case of fiemap > this could be a valid query to ext4_map_blocks. > So in case if !create then return 0. This also makes ext4_warning to > ext4_debug in ext4_block_to_path() for the same reason. > > Signed-off-by: Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Hmm, won't it be cleaner to just handle this in ext4_iomap_begin_report()? We do trim map.m_len there anyway so it is only logical to trim it to proper value supported by the inode on-disk format... BTW, note we have sbi->s_bitmap_maxbytes value already computed in the superblock... Honza > --- > fs/ext4/indirect.c | 11 +++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/ext4/indirect.c b/fs/ext4/indirect.c > index 3a4ab70fe9e0..e1ab495dd900 100644 > --- a/fs/ext4/indirect.c > +++ b/fs/ext4/indirect.c > @@ -102,7 +102,11 @@ static int ext4_block_to_path(struct inode *inode, > offsets[n++] = i_block & (ptrs - 1); > final = ptrs; > } else { > - ext4_warning(inode->i_sb, "block %lu > max in inode %lu", > + /* > + * It's not yet an error to just query beyond max > + * block in inode. Fiemap callers may do so. > + */ > + ext4_debug("block %lu > max in inode %lu", > i_block + direct_blocks + > indirect_blocks + double_blocks, inode->i_ino); > } > @@ -537,8 +541,11 @@ int ext4_ind_map_blocks(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode, > depth = ext4_block_to_path(inode, map->m_lblk, offsets, > &blocks_to_boundary); > > - if (depth == 0) > + if (depth == 0) { > + if (!(flags & EXT4_GET_BLOCKS_CREATE)) > + err = 0; > goto out; > + } > > partial = ext4_get_branch(inode, depth, offsets, chain, &err); > > -- > 2.21.0 > -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR