From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Theodore Ts'o Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] update i_disksize coherently with block allocation Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 08:26:40 -0400 Message-ID: <20140826122640.GI11317@thunk.org> References: <1408707147-22482-1-git-send-email-dmonakhov@openvz.org> <1408707147-22482-6-git-send-email-dmonakhov@openvz.org> <20140826011310.GB11317@thunk.org> <87egw3ae0x.fsf@openvz.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, lczerner@redhat.com To: Dmitry Monakhov Return-path: Received: from imap.thunk.org ([74.207.234.97]:49633 "EHLO imap.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754820AbaHZM0u (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Aug 2014 08:26:50 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87egw3ae0x.fsf@openvz.org> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 11:47:10AM +0400, Dmitry Monakhov wrote: > No. patch was written like this from very beginning. > By logic is follows. We must update i_disksize in the same transaction > Before the patch i_disksize was updated only if requested range was fully completed. > But we also have to update it in case of error. And patch fix what. Ok, I'll update the commit description to make it clear that what we're fixing is on the error path. Thanks!! - Ted P.S. I haven't forgotten about your 1/5 patch; I'm just currently prioritizing patches that will get pushed to Linus during the current development cycle. I'll do a second pass for cleanup and new feature commits (i.e., things that aren't stable kernel fodder) after I push fixes to Linus for -rc3.