On 2014-02-17 11:06, Ryusuke Konishi wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 10:17:57 +0100, Andreas Rohner wrote:
>> On 2014-02-17 04:00, Ryusuke Konishi wrote:
>>>> + if (end > nilfs->ns_nsegments)
>>>> + end = nilfs->ns_nsegments;
>>>
>>> Yes, this adjustment is what we should do here, but 'end' segnum was
>>> rounded down to segment alighment before. So, it should be:
>>>
>>> if (end >= nilfs->ns_nsegments)
>>> end = nilfs->ns_nsegments - 1;
>>>
>>>> + if (end == segnum)
>>>> + goto out;
>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>> if (end < segnum)
>>> goto out;
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> + down_read(&NILFS_MDT(sufile)->mi_sem);
>>>> +
>>>> + while (segnum < end) {
>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>> while (segnum <= end) {
>>>
>>>> + n = min_t(unsigned long,
>>>> + segusages_per_block -
>>>> + nilfs_sufile_get_offset(sufile, segnum),
>>>> + end - segnum);
>>>
>>> Then, we can reuse nilfs_sufile_segment_usages_in_block() to calculate
>>> 'n'.
>>
>> Actually I don't think that is correct. What if range->start = 0 and
>> range->end = 8MB. Then segnum = 0 and end = 1. Your code would discard
>> segment 0 and segment 1, whereas my version would discard only segment
>> 0, which seems to be more reasonable.
>
> The problem seems that 'end' is not calculated properly.
> I think it should be
>
> end = nilfs_get_segnum_of_block(
> nilfs,
> (range->start + range->len + <segment-size-in-bytes> - 1)
> >> nilfs->ns_blocksize_bits) - 1;
>
> or can be simplified to
>
> end = nilfs_get_segnum_of_block(
> nilfs,
> (range->start + range->len - 1) >> nilfs->ns_blocksize_bits);
>
> if range->len > 0 is guaranteed.
>
>
> The calculation of segnum extends the range to be discarded since it
> is rounded down to segment alignment, but that of the current
> implementation for 'end' truncates the range. Both should be
> extended.
Then shouldn't both be truncated? The user expects that less bytes than
range->len are discarded but not more. Maybe I am wrong and it is
defined somewhere...
Regards,
Andreas Rohner
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nilfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
