On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 4:44 PM Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
snip
> > @@ -2419,8 +2418,16 @@ open_devices(
> > xi->dsize &= sector_mask;
> > xi->rtsize &= sector_mask;
> > xi->logBBsize &= (uint64_t)-1 << (max(cfg->lsectorlog, 10) - BBSHIFT);
> > +}
> >
> > -
> > +static void
> > +discard_data(
>
> Perhaps discard_devices(), since this function can DISCARD more than
> just the data device.
Agreed.
>
> > + struct libxfs_xinit *xi,
> > + bool discard)
> > +{
> > + /*
> > + * This function has to be called after libxfs has been initialized.
> > + */
> > if (!discard)
> > return;
> >
>
> While we're on the topic, I notice that we skip discard for any device
> that's actually a file. Seeing as fallocate(PUNCH_HOLE) works on files
> (and block devices), is there a reason why we avoid punching out fs
> image files?
>
>From what I remember, it went along this: If the user is trying to
mkfs an existing file, we don't want to destroy anything they did with
the file before (sparse file, allocations...).
> > @@ -3901,7 +3908,7 @@ main(
> > /*
> > * Open and validate the device configurations
> > */
> > - open_devices(&cfg, &xi, (discard && !dry_run));
> > + open_devices(&cfg, &xi);
> > validate_datadev(&cfg, &cli);
> > validate_logdev(&cfg, &cli, &logfile);
> > validate_rtdev(&cfg, &cli, &rtfile);
> > @@ -3952,6 +3959,11 @@ main(
> > exit(0);
> > }
> >
> > + /*
> > + * All values have been validated, discard the old device layout.
> > + */
> > + discard_data(&xi, (discard && !dry_run));
>
> if (discard && !dry_run)
> discard_devices(&xi);
>
> ?
Yes, this makes more sense.
Jan
--
Jan Tulak
jtulak@xxxxxxxxxx / jan@xxxxxxxx
