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
> >>>>
> >>>> 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.

Thanks,

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-09-30 18:05    [W:0.056 / U:1.188 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site