From: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/8] xfs: flush eof folio before insert range size update
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2026 14:24:18 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aa8QUlEHNu0C01zF@bfoster> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260309173213.GN6033@frogsfrogsfrogs>
On Mon, Mar 09, 2026 at 10:32:13AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 09, 2026 at 09:45:02AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> > The flush in xfs_buffered_write_iomap_begin() for zero range over a
> > data fork hole fronted by COW fork prealloc is primarily designed to
> > provide correct zeroing behavior in particular pagecache conditions.
> > As it turns out, this also partially masks some odd behavior in
> > insert range (via zero range via setattr).
> >
> > Insert range bumps i_size the length of the new range, flushes,
> > unmaps pagecache and cancels COW prealloc, and then right shifts
> > extents from the end of the file back to the target offset of the
> > insert. Since the i_size update occurs before the pagecache flush,
> > this creates a transient situation where writeback around EOF can
> > behave differently.
> >
> > This appears to be corner case situation, but if happens to be
> > fronted by COW fork speculative preallocation and a large, dirty
> > folio that contains at least one full COW block beyond EOF, the
>
> How do we get a large dirty folio with at least one full cow block
> beyond i_size? If we did a pagecache write to the file, then at least
> the incore isize should have been boosted out far enough that the block
> will now be inside EOF, right?
>
It's been quite some time since I first reproduced and diagnosed this so
I'm going from memory, but IIRC it was some odd case like a failure to
split a large folio fully within EOF on a truncate down across it due to
being dirty. I originally thought the large folio thing was actually the
issue, but I don't recall seeing anything that prevents it in this
particular situation. So my understanding from that is that it's more
unexpected in that we wouldn't create a large folio directly in this
situation, but it's still technically possible through oddball fsx
sequences.
From there, we can run into the insert situation described above where
the i_size update -> flush -> extent shift behavior creates a transient
situation where a post-eof block is temporarily within eof.
Brian
> --D
>
> > writeback after i_size is bumped may remap that COW fork block into
> > the data fork within EOF. The block is zeroed and then shifted back
> > out to post-eof, but this is unexpected in that it leads to a
> > written post-eof data fork block. This can cause a zero range
> > warning on a subsequent size extension, because we should never find
> > blocks that require physical zeroing beyond i_size.
> >
> > To avoid this quirk, flush the EOF folio before the i_size update
> > during insert range. The entire range will be flushed, unmapped and
> > invalidated anyways, so this should be relatively unnoticeable.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> > ---
> > fs/xfs/xfs_file.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
> > index 6246f34df9fd..48d812b99282 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
> > @@ -1263,6 +1263,23 @@ xfs_falloc_insert_range(
> > if (offset >= isize)
> > return -EINVAL;
> >
> > + /*
> > + * Let writeback clean up EOF folio state before we bump i_size. The
> > + * insert flushes before it starts shifting and under certain
> > + * circumstances we can write back blocks that should technically be
> > + * considered post-eof (and thus should not be submitted for writeback).
> > + *
> > + * For example, a large, dirty folio that spans EOF and is backed by
> > + * post-eof COW fork preallocation can cause block remap into the data
> > + * fork. This shifts back out beyond EOF, but creates an expectedly
> > + * written post-eof block. The insert is going to flush, unmap and
> > + * cancel prealloc across this whole range, so flush EOF now before we
> > + * bump i_size to provide consistent behavior.
> > + */
> > + error = filemap_write_and_wait_range(inode->i_mapping, isize, isize);
> > + if (error)
> > + return error;
> > +
> > error = xfs_falloc_setsize(file, isize + len);
> > if (error)
> > return error;
> > --
> > 2.52.0
> >
> >
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-09 18:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-09 13:44 [PATCH v3 0/8] iomap, xfs: improve zero range flushing and lookup Brian Foster
2026-03-09 13:44 ` [PATCH v3 1/8] xfs: fix iomap hole map reporting for zoned zero range Brian Foster
2026-03-09 17:11 ` Darrick J. Wong
2026-03-09 18:18 ` Brian Foster
2026-03-10 14:47 ` Darrick J. Wong
2026-03-10 6:45 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-03-09 13:45 ` [PATCH v3 2/8] xfs: flush dirty pagecache over hole in zoned mode " Brian Foster
2026-03-09 17:22 ` Darrick J. Wong
2026-03-09 18:19 ` Brian Foster
2026-03-10 6:47 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-03-10 14:48 ` Darrick J. Wong
2026-03-10 6:45 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-03-09 13:45 ` [PATCH v3 3/8] iomap, xfs: lift zero range hole mapping flush into xfs Brian Foster
2026-03-09 17:40 ` Darrick J. Wong
2026-03-10 6:47 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-03-09 13:45 ` [PATCH v3 4/8] xfs: flush eof folio before insert range size update Brian Foster
2026-03-09 17:32 ` Darrick J. Wong
2026-03-09 18:24 ` Brian Foster [this message]
2026-03-09 13:45 ` [PATCH v3 5/8] xfs: look up cow fork extent earlier for buffered iomap_begin Brian Foster
2026-03-09 13:45 ` [PATCH v3 6/8] xfs: only flush when COW fork blocks overlap data fork holes Brian Foster
2026-03-09 17:47 ` Darrick J. Wong
2026-03-09 13:45 ` [PATCH v3 7/8] xfs: replace zero range flush with folio batch Brian Foster
2026-03-09 17:48 ` Darrick J. Wong
2026-03-09 13:45 ` [PATCH v3 8/8] xfs: report cow mappings with dirty pagecache for iomap zero range Brian Foster
2026-03-09 17:56 ` Darrick J. Wong
2026-03-09 18:31 ` Brian Foster
2026-03-09 18:38 ` Darrick J. Wong
2026-03-10 6:50 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-03-10 14:52 ` Darrick J. Wong
2026-03-10 14:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-03-10 6:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-03-10 6:45 ` [PATCH v3 0/8] iomap, xfs: improve zero range flushing and lookup 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=aa8QUlEHNu0C01zF@bfoster \
--to=bfoster@redhat.com \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--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.