On Tue 24-05-22 01:38:44, Ritesh Harjani wrote: > On 22/05/21 09:42PM, Baokun Li wrote: > > When either of the "start + size <= ac->ac_o_ex.fe_logical" or > > "start > ac->ac_o_ex.fe_logical" conditions is met, it indicates > > that the fe_logical is not in the allocated range. > > Sounds about right to me based on the logic in ext4_mb_use_inode_pa(). > We try to allocate/preallocate such that ac->ac_o_ex.fe_logical should fall > within the preallocated range. So if our start or start + size doesn't include > fe_logical then it is a bug in the ext4_mb_normalize_request() logic. I agree ac->ac_o_ex.fe_logical is a goal block. But AFAIK it never was a hard guarantee that we would allocate extent that includes that block. It was always treated as a hint only. In particular if you look at the logic in ext4_mb_normalize_request() it does shift the start of the allocation to avoid preallocated ranges etc. so I don't see how we are guaranteed that ext4_mb_normalize_request() will result in an allocation request that includes ac->ac_o_ex.fe_logical. Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR
