From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2354423ABB9 for ; Fri, 14 Aug 2026 10:16:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786702571; cv=none; b=nNxZ+nR05aBxLthcy1/H6iJuw+Ua/BYlxGrdy3akGyiARhQYvxZtfpHX0hR37PkWKZldF/WZd5lSFDdvUR/LJlXwQOq2E2G5RdYNT+oECwi9c6jE2dXlDco/lkKRNME2PJbqLWUtZ+X3zLz30kvQemK6eEFxoFFmNV6P9gGjYUI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786702571; c=relaxed/simple; bh=UE+3f++M8NhsYlZ+lfljcqQgJDQ7xq0pXW4kWNrNU+c=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=iYR0R4vBv0K6JF/YZyJ67np/yR5+EqfVMRuYeBxf6KoiNhsgUvIR7rwxR5mDjFqEkKrGB+SUDIEmfl+/xASzT/ooZ2LS8Urqs8V+gOY2AnvP1/iDyV+7aLKKRbxKQ8Rp0YsBiTrqR/3zzklFpzroB7eSwL6zCv7Xx30p1tkoPD0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=Xf2L6QXl; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="Xf2L6QXl" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 04B341F00A3A; Fri, 14 Aug 2026 10:15:59 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1786702560; bh=UE+3f++M8NhsYlZ+lfljcqQgJDQ7xq0pXW4kWNrNU+c=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=Xf2L6QXljC711vXTKuNE7fwrroJFUu7T5hf31pYhZuWBpzmDUr6a0rChjhWnVsbaB d0Ledznj95f/rIxmucyCrG5gn4/t0aI2YImN7FUkm6bNPZpr7y6NxR/A6UT46zttov lu1EOdI5OCh6Kurq07ua/38/K+vQXwkB99s8XODXKmxsZJbWls2rHpuBxG7r3LkX9z BttLf3DrJi10yXeQ4JtDV9hsfBPqW/5yQvs7kuTY14ChXRjsTGbLries8fx50Ixjhc 8huQXWdOO8JrOtLjoXz56ROGEjHh6DLL8A76NAKTom7o8j2/d/c51DKDL9//0h5GGi e6QU8urBX9Tvg== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v5 09/32] ext4: avoid unnecessary transaction in ext4_map_blocks() for unwritten extents Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Zhang Yi" Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu In-Reply-To: <20260814093331.1703882-10-yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com> References: <20260814093331.1703882-1-yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com> <20260814093331.1703882-10-yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 10:15:59 +0000 Message-Id: <20260814101600.04B341F00A3A@smtp.kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: > From: Zhang Yi >=20 > When ext4_map_blocks() finds an unwritten extent in the extent cache and > the caller is willing to accept unwritten extents without conversion, > there is no need to start a journal transaction since no metadata update > is required. This avoids unnecessary transaction overhead in the > upcoming iomap writeback path when overwriting already-allocated > unwritten extents. >=20 > One thing to be careful about, as the comment in ext4_map_blocks() > states, if the flags contain EXT4_GET_BLOCKS_CREATE, the function will > mark @map as mapped. >=20 > Signed-off-by: Zhang Yi Sashiko has reviewed this patch and found no issues. It looks great! --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260814093331.1703= 882-1-yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com?part=3D9