On Sun, 16 Mar 2014, tytso@xxxxxxx wrote: > Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 23:02:01 -0400 > From: tytso@xxxxxxx > To: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6 v2] ext4: Update inode i_size after the preallocation > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 08:14:34PM +0100, Lukas Czerner wrote: > > Currently in ext4_fallocate we would update inode size, c_time and sync > > the file with every partial allocation which is entirely unnecessary. It > > is true that if the crash happens in the middle of truncate we might end > > up with unchanged i size, or c_time which I do not think is really a > > problem - it does not mean file system corruption in any way. Note that > > xfs is doing things the same way e.g. update all of the mentioned after > > the allocation is done. > > > > This commit moves all the updates after the allocation is done. In > > addition we also need to change m_time as not only inode has been change > > bot also data regions might have changed (unwritten extents). However > > m_time will be only updated when i_size changed. > > > > Also we do not need to be paranoid about changing the c_time only if the > > actual allocation have happened, we can change it even if we try to > > allocate only to find out that there are already block allocated. It's > > not really a big deal and it will save us some additional complexity. > > > > Also use ext4_debug, instead of ext4_warning in #ifdef EXT4FS_DEBUG > > section. > > > > Signed-off-by: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Further testing has shown that this patch (applied on top of the ext4 > dev branch) is causing a regression failure of xfstests shared/243. > > Could you take a look? > > - Ted Hi Ted, I am looking into this. Thanks! -Lukas _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
