On 2021/7/15 20:08, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Thu 15-07-21 09:54:51, Zhang Yi wrote:
>> Now that the inline_data file write end procedure are falled into the
>> common write end functions, it is not clear. Factor them out and do
>> some cleanup. This patch also drop ext4_da_write_inline_data_end()
>> and switch to use ext4_write_inline_data_end() instead because we also
>> need to do the same error processing if we failed to write data into
>> inline entry.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Just two small comments below.
>
>> diff --git a/fs/ext4/inline.c b/fs/ext4/inline.c
>> index 28b666f25ac2..3d227b32b21c 100644
>> --- a/fs/ext4/inline.c
>> +++ b/fs/ext4/inline.c
> ...
>> +out:
>> + /*
>> + * If we have allocated more blocks and copied less. We will have
>> + * blocks allocated outside inode->i_size, so truncate them.
>> + */
>> + if (pos + len > inode->i_size && ext4_can_truncate(inode))
>> + ext4_orphan_add(handle, inode);
>
> I don't think we need this error handling here. For inline data we never
> allocate any blocks so shorter writes don't need any cleanup.
>
>> - return copied;
>> + ret2 = ext4_journal_stop(handle);
>> + if (!ret)
>> + ret = ret2;
>> + if (pos + len > inode->i_size) {
>> + ext4_truncate_failed_write(inode);
>> + /*
>> + * If truncate failed early the inode might still be
>> + * on the orphan list; we need to make sure the inode
>> + * is removed from the orphan list in that case.
>> + */
>> + if (inode->i_nlink)
>> + ext4_orphan_del(NULL, inode);
>> + }
>
> And this can go away as well...
>
Yeah, but if we don't call ext4_truncate_failed_write()->..->
ext4_inline_data_truncate(), it will lead to incorrect larger i_inline_size
and data entry. Although it seems harmless (i_size can prevent read zero
data), I think it's better to restore the data entry(the comments need
change later), or else it will occupy more xattr space. What do you think ?
Thanks,
Yi.
