From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Carlos Maiolino <cem@kernel.org>,
Hans Holmberg <hans.holmberg@wdc.com>,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] xfs: document another racy GC case in xfs_zoned_map_extent
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2025 08:30:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251023063055.GA29593@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251023062125.GQ3356773@frogsfrogsfrogs>
On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 11:21:25PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > + * Note that this can also happen when racing with operations that do
> > + * not actually invalidate the data, but just move it to a different
> > + * inode (XFS_IOC_EXCHANGE_RANGE), or to a different offset inside the
> > + * inode (FALLOC_FL_COLLAPSE_RANGE / FALLOC_FL_INSERT_RANGE). If the
>
> Or (eventually) this will also be possible if zonegc races with a plain
> remapping via FICLONERANGE, right?
>
> (Like, whenever reflink gets implemented)
Yes.
> I guess the zonegc write completion could just iterate the rtrmapbt for
> records that overlap the old extent and remap them until there are no
> rtrmapbt entries returned. Then you'd be able to catch the
> exchange-range and reflink cases, right?
I don't think so. All these remap operation would at this point would
have remove the rmapbt record for the old record because they changed
the logical mapping. So I don't think we'd find anything useful there.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-23 6:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-17 6:07 fix for selecting a zone with active GC I/O for GC Christoph Hellwig
2025-10-17 6:07 ` [PATCH 1/2] xfs: prevent gc from picking the same zone twice Christoph Hellwig
2025-10-17 12:37 ` Carlos Maiolino
2025-10-20 11:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-10-18 4:08 ` Damien Le Moal
2025-10-23 6:16 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-10-23 6:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-10-23 15:02 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-10-23 15:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-10-17 6:07 ` [PATCH 2/2] xfs: document another racy GC case in xfs_zoned_map_extent Christoph Hellwig
2025-10-17 12:40 ` Carlos Maiolino
2025-10-18 4:09 ` Damien Le Moal
2025-10-20 8:19 ` Hans Holmberg
2025-10-23 6:21 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-10-23 6:30 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2025-10-23 15:17 fix for selecting a zone with active GC I/O for GC v2 Christoph Hellwig
2025-10-23 15:17 ` [PATCH 2/2] xfs: document another racy GC case in xfs_zoned_map_extent Christoph Hellwig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20251023063055.GA29593@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=cem@kernel.org \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=hans.holmberg@wdc.com \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.