lOn Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 04:03:56PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > So there's clearly something wrong here - it's likely that the > filesystem IO alignment parameters pulled from the underlying block > device (4k physical, 512 byte logical sector sizes) are improperly > interpreted. i.e. for a filesystem with a sector size of 4kB, > direct IO with an alignment of 512 bytes should be rejected...... I wonder if it's something in the truncation code that's splitting folios that ought not to be split. Does this test possibly keep folios in cache that maybe get invalidated? truncate_inode_partial_folio() is the one i'm most concernd about. but i'm also severely jetlagged.