lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Sep]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH v2] f2fs: introduce F2FS_IOC_START_ATOMIC_REPLACE
On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 9:04 AM Daeho Jeong <daeho43@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Hi Daeho,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> isize should be updated after tagging inode as atomic_write one?
> > >>>> otherwise f2fs_mark_inode_dirty_sync() may update isize to inode page,
> > >>>> latter checkpoint may persist that change? IIUC...
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Thanks,
> > >>>
> > >>> Hi Chao,
> > >>>
> > >>> The first patch of this patchset prevents the inode page from being
> > >>> updated as dirty for atomic file cases.
> > >>> Is there any other chances for the inode page to be marked as dirty?
> > >>
> > >> I mean:
> > >>
> > >> Thread A Thread B
> > >> - f2fs_ioc_start_atomic_write
> > >> - f2fs_i_size_write(inode, 0)
> > >> - f2fs_mark_inode_dirty_sync
> > >> - checkpoint
> > >> - persist inode with incorrect zero isize
> > >>
> > >> - set_inode_flag(inode, FI_ATOMIC_FILE)
> > >>
> > >> Am I missing something?
> > >>
> > >
> > > So, f2fs_mark_inode_dirty_sync() will not work for atomic files
> > > anymore, which means it doesn't make the inode dirty.
> > > Plz, refer to the first patch of this patchset. Or I might be confused
> > > with something. :(
> >
> > I mean FI_ATOMIC_FILE was set after f2fs_i_size_write(), so inode will be set
> > as dirty.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
>
> Oh, I was confused that f2fs_update_inode() is called in
> f2fs_mark_inode_dirty_sync().
> That is called in f2fs_write_inode(). Let me fix this.

Hmm, I think the issue was already there before my patch.
So, how about making the inode flushed and clean if the inode is
already dirty when starting atomic write?

>
> Thanks,

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-09-30 22:03    [W:0.049 / U:0.188 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site