From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA417C19F28 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2022 15:14:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235853AbiHCPO6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Aug 2022 11:14:58 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:49740 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233652AbiHCPO5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Aug 2022 11:14:57 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 1085 seconds by postgrey-1.37 at lindbergh.monkeyblade.net; Wed, 03 Aug 2022 08:14:55 PDT Received: from cczrelay02.in2p3.fr (cczrelay02.in2p3.fr [134.158.66.142]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C7F223A492 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2022 08:14:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cczmbox08.in2p3.fr (cczmbox08.in2p3.fr [134.158.66.138]) by cczrelay02.in2p3.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 273Euh2b015741 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2022 16:56:43 +0200 Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2022 16:56:43 +0200 (CEST) From: Emmanouil Vamvakopoulos Reply-To: Emmanouil Vamvakopoulos To: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <1106593372.70825641.1659538603200.JavaMail.zimbra@ijclab.in2p3.fr> In-Reply-To: <1586129076.70820212.1659538177737.JavaMail.zimbra@ijclab.in2p3.fr> References: <1586129076.70820212.1659538177737.JavaMail.zimbra@ijclab.in2p3.fr> Subject: s_bmap and flags explanation MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [90.26.79.197] X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.7.11_GA_3865 (ZimbraWebClient - FF103 (Mac)/8.7.11_GA_3865) Thread-Topic: s_bmap and flags explanation Thread-Index: UqNvU8JZxZ04lq01qs/KAVsT9pnUa/yuahuv Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Hello developers It is possible to explain the FLAGS field in xfs_bmap output of a file EXT: FILE-OFFSET BLOCK-RANGE AG AG-OFFSET TOTAL FLAGS 0: [0..7]: 49700520968..49700520975 30 (8..15) 8 001111 1: [8..4175871]: 49708756480..49712932343 30 (8235520..12411383) 4175864 000111 2: [4175872..19976191]: 49715788288..49731588607 30 (15267328..31067647) 15800320 000011 3: [19976192..25153535]: 49731588608..49736765951 30 (31067648..36244991) 5177344 000011 4: [25153536..41930743]: 49767625216..49784402423 30 (67104256..83881463) 16777208 000111 5: [41930744..58707951]: 49784402424..49801179631 30 (83881464..100658671) 16777208 001111 6: [58707952..58959935]: 49801179632..49801431615 30 (100658672..100910655) 251984 001111 7: [58959936..75485159]: 49801431616..49817956839 30 (100910656..117435879) 16525224 001111 with [disk06]# du -sh ./00000869/014886f4 36G ./00000869/014886f4 [disk06]# du -sh --apparent-size ./00000869/014886f4 29G ./00000869/014886f4 I try to understand if this file contains unused externs and how those file are created like this (if we assume that the free space was not fragmented ) we are running CentOS Stream release 8 with 4.18.0-383.el8.x86_64 if I defrag the file above the difference bewteen apparent size and size with du disappered ! thank you in advance best e.v.