From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (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 1863C22FADE; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 05:47:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736920050; cv=none; b=Yuj4YfhMxz63qOKUQyHruYkONAH7OYiscDsL0NXjCFo++R1C8hqyDohEay/705XFTCv9l/uK0XSjR8IZr8BhP89NxDTISJEYL17+x+XHYbBfO80pjU96XPx9djM/3HJblnXhekoQqSAHGGUX5hh022h1oD2G1WdHWb8bQyshdA4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736920050; c=relaxed/simple; bh=5jSZK1Z9Bpjw1utOhiCZcKwL8K6rGFX2KAqlrBSB2G4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=LoUIC3QZYOd4iEhJzmjwH1uzWQ2XoebJn5SV1KPCjSSmQj/XvnKeP8iWDL9b/Jv3T0NXqh3yoCtreQBx5v6oeMpv3GDFF5JthmFs2wJwfTavKVSKwPE5kcgGRNBP7fecjZKOXio0FoukkpFlCCMg+bsvNDHwQGIyCOjs6I7rI3w= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=wE0/mrnN; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="wE0/mrnN" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version :References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=PRDLe+L5j5CVpXfGzAT5mJagZMzfWPDZP/TxI5B4s3o=; b=wE0/mrnNIEzYpuJmAkwHd41Rmr cRphSjuccNZr7gK8qWlSIqk+iUSPCbTtCnbGeKiaiEUvxcVHwuzmyU1feHlv3lOFgEiKP0WIyrNcr Y6GYDJEmCf2zJEIahpZUX//xug89MVy8GRwC990I91kHsL/xVWPrUveOJWecema2bUZjll4okJVDb qJS13+T1GOd1OlUZ0Z20xAUcW0EhK252SyBv3P2u1x17J7vSCsYCpq0dy5WthycPMXD7YFRZYBXw2 ITchuS44smER5gtT5CR60ZFB2CglIZ5Ffc8hUZGZX2gwkaIaKmICjBFEr5iIMUVMqpwyPtRXr34p+ jQzrDzcQ==; Received: from hch by bombadil.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1tXwFU-0000000Aiji-2lIy; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 05:47:28 +0000 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:47:28 -0800 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Brian Foster Cc: Christoph Hellwig , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RFCv2 2/4] iomap: optional zero range dirty folio processing Message-ID: References: <20241213150528.1003662-1-bfoster@redhat.com> <20241213150528.1003662-3-bfoster@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org. See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 09:32:37AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote: > In turn, this means that extending write zero range would have either > physically zeroed delalloc extents or skipped unwritten blocks, > depending on the situation. Personally, I don't think it really matters > which as there is no real guarantee that "all blocks not previously > written to are unwritten," for example, but rather just that "all blocks > not written to return zeroes on read." Yes. > For that reason, I'm _hoping_ > that we can keep this simple and just deal with some potential spurious > zeroing on folios that are already dirty, but I'm open to arguments > against that. I can't see one. But we really should fine a way to write all this including the arguments for an again down.