On Sat 31-10-20 13:05:15, Harshad Shirwadkar wrote:
> This patch adds a small number of misc fast commit fixes. Along with
> functional fixes such as setting the right buffer flags, there also
> typo fixes and comment additions.
>
> Suggested-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Harshad Shirwadkar <harshadshirwadkar@xxxxxxxxx>
Again, please don't merge logically separate fixes into one commit.
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.h b/fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.h
> index 00dc668e052b..10855cd230c7 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.h
> +++ b/fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.h
> @@ -422,9 +422,13 @@ static inline int ext4_journal_force_commit(journal_t *journal)
> static inline int ext4_jbd2_inode_add_write(handle_t *handle,
> struct inode *inode, loff_t start_byte, loff_t length)
> {
> - if (ext4_handle_valid(handle))
> + if (ext4_handle_valid(handle)) {
> + ext4_fc_track_range(handle, inode,
> + start_byte >> inode->i_sb->s_blocksize_bits,
> + (start_byte + length) >> inode->i_sb->s_blocksize_bits);
> return jbd2_journal_inode_ranged_write(handle,
> EXT4_I(inode)->jinode, start_byte, length);
> + }
Why this change? A good changelog would tell me... I'm suspicious here
because ext4_jbd2_inode_add_write() gets called only in data=ordered mode
but fastcommit can run also in data=writeback mode...
I suppose this is for the mmap coverage we were speaking about. Now that
I'm speaking about it again maybe the ext4_fc_track_range() call in
ext4_map_blocks() is actually enough? I mean once we allocate blocks for a
range (either from page fault, write, or writeback of delalloc), they will
become properly tracked in ext4_map_blocks() and that's all we need? But
then I'm missing why we have so many ext4_fc_track_range() calls around the
code... Can you please explain?
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR
