On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 02:05:47PM -0500, Brian Foster wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 06:17:03PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Refactor the part of _free_eofblocks that decides if it's really going
> > to truncate post-EOF blocks into a separate helper function. The
> > upcoming deferred inode inactivation patch requires us to be able to
> > decide this prior to actual inactivation. No functionality changes.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > fs/xfs/xfs_bmap_util.c | 101 ++++++++++++++++++++----------------------------
> > fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c | 32 +++++++++++++++
> > fs/xfs/xfs_inode.h | 1
> > 3 files changed, 75 insertions(+), 59 deletions(-)
> >
> >
> ...
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
> > index c8bf02be0003..662ee537ffb5 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
> > @@ -3568,3 +3568,35 @@ xfs_irele(
> > trace_xfs_irele(ip, _RET_IP_);
> > iput(VFS_I(ip));
> > }
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Decide if this inode have post-EOF blocks. The caller is responsible
> > + * for knowing / caring about the PREALLOC/APPEND flags.
> > + */
> > +bool
> > +xfs_inode_has_posteof_blocks(
>
> I think something like xfs_has_eofblocks() is more consistent with the
> other related function names (i.e., xfs_free_eofblocks(),
> xfs_can_free_eofblocks(), etc.).
<nod>
> > + struct xfs_inode *ip)
> > +{
> > + struct xfs_bmbt_irec imap;
> > + struct xfs_mount *mp = ip->i_mount;
> > + xfs_fileoff_t end_fsb;
> > + xfs_fileoff_t last_fsb;
> > + xfs_filblks_t map_len;
> > + int nimaps;
> > + int error;
> > +
> > + end_fsb = XFS_B_TO_FSB(mp, (xfs_ufsize_t)XFS_ISIZE(ip));
> > + last_fsb = XFS_B_TO_FSB(mp, mp->m_super->s_maxbytes);
> > + if (last_fsb <= end_fsb)
> > + return false;
> > + map_len = last_fsb - end_fsb;
> > +
> > + nimaps = 1;
> > + xfs_ilock(ip, XFS_ILOCK_SHARED);
> > + error = xfs_bmapi_read(ip, end_fsb, map_len, &imap, &nimaps, 0);
> > + xfs_iunlock(ip, XFS_ILOCK_SHARED);
> > +
> > + return !error && (nimaps != 0) &&
> > + (imap.br_startblock != HOLESTARTBLOCK ||
> > + ip->i_delayed_blks);
>
> I don't think we should be suppressing this error. It's a divergence
> from the current code at least.
Ooh, yeah, good catch. I'll fix that up.
--D
> Brian
>
> > +}
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.h b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.h
> > index be2014520155..02a938661ba8 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.h
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.h
> > @@ -499,5 +499,6 @@ extern struct kmem_zone *xfs_inode_zone;
> > #define XFS_DEFAULT_COWEXTSZ_HINT 32
> >
> > bool xfs_inode_verify_forks(struct xfs_inode *ip);
> > +bool xfs_inode_has_posteof_blocks(struct xfs_inode *ip);
> >
> > #endif /* __XFS_INODE_H__ */
> >
