xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [PATCH v3 2/10] xfs: Add support FALLOC_FL_INSERT_RANGE for fallocat

To: 'Brian Foster' <bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 2/10] xfs: Add support FALLOC_FL_INSERT_RANGE for fallocate
From: Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 09:10:35 +0900
Cc: 'Dave Chinner' <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, 'Ashish Sangwan' <a.sangwan@xxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Dlp-filter: Pass
In-reply-to: <20140527205959.GA26393@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <001401cf7984$4e3e1850$eaba48f0$@samsung.com> <20140527205959.GA26393@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Thread-index: AQJ/qvClO6UUMGpszt4oIbN64VB0+gGcdMg+mefYbRA=
> 
> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 05:18:57PM +0900, Namjae Jeon wrote:
> > This patch implements fallocate's FALLOC_FL_INSERT_RANGE for XFS.
> >
> > 1) Make sure that both offset and len are block size aligned.
> > 2) Update the i_size of inode by len bytes.
> > 3) Compute the file's logical block number against offset. If the computed
> >    block number is not the starting block of the extent, split the extent
> >    such that the block number is the starting block of the extent.
> > 4) Shift all the extents which are lying bewteen [offset, last allocated 
> > extent]
> >    towards right by len bytes. This step will make a hole of len bytes
> >    at offset.
> > 5) Allocate unwritten extents for the hole created in step 4.
> >
> > Cc: Brian Foster <bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Ashish Sangwan <a.sangwan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> 
> FYI, while I didn't notice any test failures so far, a run through some
> of the generic xfstests do produce some assert failures and whatnot. I
> noticed output from generic/013,091,127,263. I haven't looked at these
> much at all so far, I just wanted to get them on the list...
> 
> Namjae, I reproduced these issues running ./check -g auto with
> CONFIG_XFS_WARN enabled for XFS (to warn on assert failures). Below is a
> quick dump of output from generic/091, as an example. That one
> reproduces consistently for me. We'll probably want to run through and
> squash this and any others before this gets merged.
Hi Brian.

I will check this problem.
Thanks for your help!
> 
> Brian
> 
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > xfs mailing list
> > xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>