Dave, On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 09:24:33AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 10:16:12AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 09:36:10AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > > + /* > > > > + * Even after flushing the inode, there can still be > > > > + * delalloc blocks on the inode beyond EOF due to > > > > + * speculative reallocation. These are not removed > > > > > > "speculative preallocation" > > > > I just re-indented the comment, the wording is the original one. Maybe > > we'll get a commit that cares enought to fix it on the fly.. > > Actually, I checked that before commenting on it - the original > comment is correct: > > 626 /* > 627 * even after flushing the inode, there can still be delalloc > 628 * blocks on the inode beyond EOF due to speculative > 629 * preallocation. These are not removed until the release > 630 * function is called or the inode is inactivated. Hence we > 631 * cannot assert here that ip->i_delayed_blks == 0. > 632 */ > > I wouldn't have pointed at it if the original code had that > problem... :/ If you want to extend your Reviewed-by: on this patch I will clean up the spelling mistake and pull in this series. -Ben _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
