xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH block/for-linus] writeback: fix syncing of I_DIRTY_TIME inode

To: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH block/for-linus] writeback: fix syncing of I_DIRTY_TIME inodes
From: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 11:16:03 +0200
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>, Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx>, Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx>, Eryu Guan <eguan@xxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, axboe@xxxxxx, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, kernel-team@xxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20150817200254.GG21075@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20150812101204.GE17933@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20150813004435.GN3902@dastard> <20150813224415.GG4496@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20150814111408.GB8710@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20150817200254.GG21075@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Mon 17-08-15 16:02:54, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Jan.
> 
> On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 01:14:09PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > So the patch looks good to me. But the fact that is fixes Eryu's problem
> > means there is something fishy going on. Either inodes get wrongly attached
> 
> Seriously, it shouldn't affect size syncing or xfs but then again my
> understanding of xfs is severely limited.

Well, i_size == 0 in XFS usually means that writeback didn't get to
flushing delay allocated pages - inode size on disk gets increased only
after the pages are written out in ->end_io callback. So at least this part
makes some sense to me.

                                                                Honza
 
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR

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