[PATCH 1/4] fsx: add missing file size update on zero range operations

[PATCH 1/4] fsx: add missing file size update on zero range operations

[fdmanana]

From: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>

When a zero range operation increases the size of the test file we were
not updating the global variable 'file_size' which tracks the current
size of the test file. This variable is used to for example compute the
offset for a source range of clone, dedupe and copy file range operations.

So just fix it by updating the 'file_size' global variable whenever a zero
range operation does not use the keep size flag and its range goes beyond
the current file size.

Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
---
 ltp/fsx.c | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/ltp/fsx.c b/ltp/fsx.c
index 9d598a4f..fa383c94 100644
--- a/ltp/fsx.c
+++ b/ltp/fsx.c
@@ -1212,6 +1212,8 @@ do_zero_range(unsigned offset, unsigned length, int keep_size)
 	}
 
 	end_offset = keep_size ? 0 : offset + length;
+	if (!keep_size && end_offset > file_size)
+		file_size = end_offset;
 
 	if (end_offset > biggest) {
 		biggest = end_offset;
-- 
2.11.0

Re: [PATCH 1/4] fsx: add missing file size update on zero range operations

[Brian Foster]

On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 11:35:52AM +0100, fdmanana@kernel.org wrote:
> From: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
> 
> When a zero range operation increases the size of the test file we were
> not updating the global variable 'file_size' which tracks the current
> size of the test file. This variable is used to for example compute the
> offset for a source range of clone, dedupe and copy file range operations.
> 
> So just fix it by updating the 'file_size' global variable whenever a zero
> range operation does not use the keep size flag and its range goes beyond
> the current file size.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
> ---
>  ltp/fsx.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/ltp/fsx.c b/ltp/fsx.c
> index 9d598a4f..fa383c94 100644
> --- a/ltp/fsx.c
> +++ b/ltp/fsx.c
> @@ -1212,6 +1212,8 @@ do_zero_range(unsigned offset, unsigned length, int keep_size)
>  	}
>  
>  	end_offset = keep_size ? 0 : offset + length;
> +	if (!keep_size && end_offset > file_size)
> +		file_size = end_offset;

Should this ever happen if the caller uses TRIM_OFF_LEN() on the
offset and length?

Brian

>  
>  	if (end_offset > biggest) {
>  		biggest = end_offset;
> -- 
> 2.11.0
> 

Re: [PATCH 1/4] fsx: add missing file size update on zero range operations

[Filipe Manana]

On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 6:10 PM Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 11:35:52AM +0100, fdmanana@kernel.org wrote:
> > From: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
> >
> > When a zero range operation increases the size of the test file we were
> > not updating the global variable 'file_size' which tracks the current
> > size of the test file. This variable is used to for example compute the
> > offset for a source range of clone, dedupe and copy file range operations.
> >
> > So just fix it by updating the 'file_size' global variable whenever a zero
> > range operation does not use the keep size flag and its range goes beyond
> > the current file size.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
> > ---
> >  ltp/fsx.c | 2 ++
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/ltp/fsx.c b/ltp/fsx.c
> > index 9d598a4f..fa383c94 100644
> > --- a/ltp/fsx.c
> > +++ b/ltp/fsx.c
> > @@ -1212,6 +1212,8 @@ do_zero_range(unsigned offset, unsigned length, int keep_size)
> >       }
> >
> >       end_offset = keep_size ? 0 : offset + length;
> > +     if (!keep_size && end_offset > file_size)
> > +             file_size = end_offset;
>
> Should this ever happen if the caller uses TRIM_OFF_LEN() on the
> offset and length?

TRIM_OFF_LEN only trims the range, not the file_size.
Or did I miss something?

Thanks.

>
> Brian
>
> >
> >       if (end_offset > biggest) {
> >               biggest = end_offset;
> > --
> > 2.11.0
> >
>

Re: [PATCH 1/4] fsx: add missing file size update on zero range operations

[Brian Foster]

On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 06:20:24PM +0100, Filipe Manana wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 6:10 PM Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 11:35:52AM +0100, fdmanana@kernel.org wrote:
> > > From: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
> > >
> > > When a zero range operation increases the size of the test file we were
> > > not updating the global variable 'file_size' which tracks the current
> > > size of the test file. This variable is used to for example compute the
> > > offset for a source range of clone, dedupe and copy file range operations.
> > >
> > > So just fix it by updating the 'file_size' global variable whenever a zero
> > > range operation does not use the keep size flag and its range goes beyond
> > > the current file size.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
> > > ---
> > >  ltp/fsx.c | 2 ++
> > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/ltp/fsx.c b/ltp/fsx.c
> > > index 9d598a4f..fa383c94 100644
> > > --- a/ltp/fsx.c
> > > +++ b/ltp/fsx.c
> > > @@ -1212,6 +1212,8 @@ do_zero_range(unsigned offset, unsigned length, int keep_size)
> > >       }
> > >
> > >       end_offset = keep_size ? 0 : offset + length;
> > > +     if (!keep_size && end_offset > file_size)
> > > +             file_size = end_offset;
> >
> > Should this ever happen if the caller uses TRIM_OFF_LEN() on the
> > offset and length?
> 
> TRIM_OFF_LEN only trims the range, not the file_size.
> Or did I miss something?
> 

Right, but TRIM_LEN() does:

        if ((off) + (len) > (size))             \                               
                (len) = (size) - (off);         \

... where size is file_size. Hm?

Brian

> Thanks.
> 
> >
> > Brian
> >
> > >
> > >       if (end_offset > biggest) {
> > >               biggest = end_offset;
> > > --
> > > 2.11.0
> > >
> >
> 

Re: [PATCH 1/4] fsx: add missing file size update on zero range operations

[Filipe Manana]

On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 6:26 PM Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 06:20:24PM +0100, Filipe Manana wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 6:10 PM Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 11:35:52AM +0100, fdmanana@kernel.org wrote:
> > > > From: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
> > > >
> > > > When a zero range operation increases the size of the test file we were
> > > > not updating the global variable 'file_size' which tracks the current
> > > > size of the test file. This variable is used to for example compute the
> > > > offset for a source range of clone, dedupe and copy file range operations.
> > > >
> > > > So just fix it by updating the 'file_size' global variable whenever a zero
> > > > range operation does not use the keep size flag and its range goes beyond
> > > > the current file size.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  ltp/fsx.c | 2 ++
> > > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/ltp/fsx.c b/ltp/fsx.c
> > > > index 9d598a4f..fa383c94 100644
> > > > --- a/ltp/fsx.c
> > > > +++ b/ltp/fsx.c
> > > > @@ -1212,6 +1212,8 @@ do_zero_range(unsigned offset, unsigned length, int keep_size)
> > > >       }
> > > >
> > > >       end_offset = keep_size ? 0 : offset + length;
> > > > +     if (!keep_size && end_offset > file_size)
> > > > +             file_size = end_offset;
> > >
> > > Should this ever happen if the caller uses TRIM_OFF_LEN() on the
> > > offset and length?
> >
> > TRIM_OFF_LEN only trims the range, not the file_size.
> > Or did I miss something?
> >
>
> Right, but TRIM_LEN() does:
>
>         if ((off) + (len) > (size))             \
>                 (len) = (size) - (off);         \
>
> ... where size is file_size. Hm?

That only updates the range's length, not the file_size.

Also, if you check the global style, you'll see that in the function
for every operation that can change file size we do update file_size
explicitly (e.g. do_preallocate(), and we call TRIM_OFF_LEN before
calling it as well).

Thanks.

>
> Brian
>
> > Thanks.
> >
> > >
> > > Brian
> > >
> > > >
> > > >       if (end_offset > biggest) {
> > > >               biggest = end_offset;
> > > > --
> > > > 2.11.0
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [PATCH 1/4] fsx: add missing file size update on zero range operations

[Brian Foster]

On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 06:32:03PM +0100, Filipe Manana wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 6:26 PM Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 06:20:24PM +0100, Filipe Manana wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 6:10 PM Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 11:35:52AM +0100, fdmanana@kernel.org wrote:
> > > > > From: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > When a zero range operation increases the size of the test file we were
> > > > > not updating the global variable 'file_size' which tracks the current
> > > > > size of the test file. This variable is used to for example compute the
> > > > > offset for a source range of clone, dedupe and copy file range operations.
> > > > >
> > > > > So just fix it by updating the 'file_size' global variable whenever a zero
> > > > > range operation does not use the keep size flag and its range goes beyond
> > > > > the current file size.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >  ltp/fsx.c | 2 ++
> > > > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/ltp/fsx.c b/ltp/fsx.c
> > > > > index 9d598a4f..fa383c94 100644
> > > > > --- a/ltp/fsx.c
> > > > > +++ b/ltp/fsx.c
> > > > > @@ -1212,6 +1212,8 @@ do_zero_range(unsigned offset, unsigned length, int keep_size)
> > > > >       }
> > > > >
> > > > >       end_offset = keep_size ? 0 : offset + length;
> > > > > +     if (!keep_size && end_offset > file_size)
> > > > > +             file_size = end_offset;
> > > >
> > > > Should this ever happen if the caller uses TRIM_OFF_LEN() on the
> > > > offset and length?
> > >
> > > TRIM_OFF_LEN only trims the range, not the file_size.
> > > Or did I miss something?
> > >
> >
> > Right, but TRIM_LEN() does:
> >
> >         if ((off) + (len) > (size))             \
> >                 (len) = (size) - (off);         \
> >
> > ... where size is file_size. Hm?
> 
> That only updates the range's length, not the file_size.
> 

Yes, but it caps the range to within file_size.

> Also, if you check the global style, you'll see that in the function
> for every operation that can change file size we do update file_size
> explicitly (e.g. do_preallocate(), and we call TRIM_OFF_LEN before
> calling it as well).
> 

do_preallocate() (fallocate) passes maxfilelen instead of file_size, as
does write and mapwrite. Insert range uses TRIM_LEN() directly but also
passes maxfilelen.

Brian

> Thanks.
> 
> >
> > Brian
> >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Brian
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >       if (end_offset > biggest) {
> > > > >               biggest = end_offset;
> > > > > --
> > > > > 2.11.0
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> 

Re: [PATCH 1/4] fsx: add missing file size update on zero range operations

[Filipe Manana]

On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 6:48 PM Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 06:32:03PM +0100, Filipe Manana wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 6:26 PM Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 06:20:24PM +0100, Filipe Manana wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 6:10 PM Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 11:35:52AM +0100, fdmanana@kernel.org wrote:
> > > > > > From: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > When a zero range operation increases the size of the test file we were
> > > > > > not updating the global variable 'file_size' which tracks the current
> > > > > > size of the test file. This variable is used to for example compute the
> > > > > > offset for a source range of clone, dedupe and copy file range operations.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So just fix it by updating the 'file_size' global variable whenever a zero
> > > > > > range operation does not use the keep size flag and its range goes beyond
> > > > > > the current file size.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > >  ltp/fsx.c | 2 ++
> > > > > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > diff --git a/ltp/fsx.c b/ltp/fsx.c
> > > > > > index 9d598a4f..fa383c94 100644
> > > > > > --- a/ltp/fsx.c
> > > > > > +++ b/ltp/fsx.c
> > > > > > @@ -1212,6 +1212,8 @@ do_zero_range(unsigned offset, unsigned length, int keep_size)
> > > > > >       }
> > > > > >
> > > > > >       end_offset = keep_size ? 0 : offset + length;
> > > > > > +     if (!keep_size && end_offset > file_size)
> > > > > > +             file_size = end_offset;
> > > > >
> > > > > Should this ever happen if the caller uses TRIM_OFF_LEN() on the
> > > > > offset and length?
> > > >
> > > > TRIM_OFF_LEN only trims the range, not the file_size.
> > > > Or did I miss something?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Right, but TRIM_LEN() does:
> > >
> > >         if ((off) + (len) > (size))             \
> > >                 (len) = (size) - (off);         \
> > >
> > > ... where size is file_size. Hm?
> >
> > That only updates the range's length, not the file_size.
> >
>
> Yes, but it caps the range to within file_size.

Yes.

The problem I'm trying to solve is that because the file_size is not
updated by zero range operations,
a following clone/dedupe/copy_range call will not be able to use a
range that crosses the old file size and goes up to the new file size.

I.e. I'm not solving a problem where the range for those operations
(or any others) incorrectly crosses eof - that doesn't happen because
of the TRIM_* macros.

Does it make sense now?

Thanks.


>
> > Also, if you check the global style, you'll see that in the function
> > for every operation that can change file size we do update file_size
> > explicitly (e.g. do_preallocate(), and we call TRIM_OFF_LEN before
> > calling it as well).
> >
>
> do_preallocate() (fallocate) passes maxfilelen instead of file_size, as
> does write and mapwrite. Insert range uses TRIM_LEN() directly but also
> passes maxfilelen.
>
> Brian
>
> > Thanks.
> >
> > >
> > > Brian
> > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Brian
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >       if (end_offset > biggest) {
> > > > > >               biggest = end_offset;
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > 2.11.0
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [PATCH 1/4] fsx: add missing file size update on zero range operations

[Brian Foster]

On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 06:53:27PM +0100, Filipe Manana wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 6:48 PM Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 06:32:03PM +0100, Filipe Manana wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 6:26 PM Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 06:20:24PM +0100, Filipe Manana wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 6:10 PM Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 11:35:52AM +0100, fdmanana@kernel.org wrote:
> > > > > > > From: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > When a zero range operation increases the size of the test file we were
> > > > > > > not updating the global variable 'file_size' which tracks the current
> > > > > > > size of the test file. This variable is used to for example compute the
> > > > > > > offset for a source range of clone, dedupe and copy file range operations.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So just fix it by updating the 'file_size' global variable whenever a zero
> > > > > > > range operation does not use the keep size flag and its range goes beyond
> > > > > > > the current file size.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > >  ltp/fsx.c | 2 ++
> > > > > > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > diff --git a/ltp/fsx.c b/ltp/fsx.c
> > > > > > > index 9d598a4f..fa383c94 100644
> > > > > > > --- a/ltp/fsx.c
> > > > > > > +++ b/ltp/fsx.c
> > > > > > > @@ -1212,6 +1212,8 @@ do_zero_range(unsigned offset, unsigned length, int keep_size)
> > > > > > >       }
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >       end_offset = keep_size ? 0 : offset + length;
> > > > > > > +     if (!keep_size && end_offset > file_size)
> > > > > > > +             file_size = end_offset;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Should this ever happen if the caller uses TRIM_OFF_LEN() on the
> > > > > > offset and length?
> > > > >
> > > > > TRIM_OFF_LEN only trims the range, not the file_size.
> > > > > Or did I miss something?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Right, but TRIM_LEN() does:
> > > >
> > > >         if ((off) + (len) > (size))             \
> > > >                 (len) = (size) - (off);         \
> > > >
> > > > ... where size is file_size. Hm?
> > >
> > > That only updates the range's length, not the file_size.
> > >
> >
> > Yes, but it caps the range to within file_size.
> 
> Yes.
> 
> The problem I'm trying to solve is that because the file_size is not
> updated by zero range operations,
> a following clone/dedupe/copy_range call will not be able to use a
> range that crosses the old file size and goes up to the new file size.
> 
> I.e. I'm not solving a problem where the range for those operations
> (or any others) incorrectly crosses eof - that doesn't happen because
> of the TRIM_* macros.
> 
> Does it make sense now?
> 

Not really. When is end_offset > file_size ever true in do_zero_range()?

Brian

> Thanks.
> 
> 
> >
> > > Also, if you check the global style, you'll see that in the function
> > > for every operation that can change file size we do update file_size
> > > explicitly (e.g. do_preallocate(), and we call TRIM_OFF_LEN before
> > > calling it as well).
> > >
> >
> > do_preallocate() (fallocate) passes maxfilelen instead of file_size, as
> > does write and mapwrite. Insert range uses TRIM_LEN() directly but also
> > passes maxfilelen.
> >
> > Brian
> >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Brian
> > > >
> > > > > Thanks.
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Brian
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >       if (end_offset > biggest) {
> > > > > > >               biggest = end_offset;
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > 2.11.0
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> 

Re: [PATCH 1/4] fsx: add missing file size update on zero range operations

[Filipe Manana]

On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 7:25 PM Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 06:53:27PM +0100, Filipe Manana wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 6:48 PM Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 06:32:03PM +0100, Filipe Manana wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 6:26 PM Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 06:20:24PM +0100, Filipe Manana wrote:
> > > > > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 6:10 PM Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 11:35:52AM +0100, fdmanana@kernel.org wrote:
> > > > > > > > From: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > When a zero range operation increases the size of the test file we were
> > > > > > > > not updating the global variable 'file_size' which tracks the current
> > > > > > > > size of the test file. This variable is used to for example compute the
> > > > > > > > offset for a source range of clone, dedupe and copy file range operations.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > So just fix it by updating the 'file_size' global variable whenever a zero
> > > > > > > > range operation does not use the keep size flag and its range goes beyond
> > > > > > > > the current file size.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
> > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > >  ltp/fsx.c | 2 ++
> > > > > > > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > diff --git a/ltp/fsx.c b/ltp/fsx.c
> > > > > > > > index 9d598a4f..fa383c94 100644
> > > > > > > > --- a/ltp/fsx.c
> > > > > > > > +++ b/ltp/fsx.c
> > > > > > > > @@ -1212,6 +1212,8 @@ do_zero_range(unsigned offset, unsigned length, int keep_size)
> > > > > > > >       }
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >       end_offset = keep_size ? 0 : offset + length;
> > > > > > > > +     if (!keep_size && end_offset > file_size)
> > > > > > > > +             file_size = end_offset;
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Should this ever happen if the caller uses TRIM_OFF_LEN() on the
> > > > > > > offset and length?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > TRIM_OFF_LEN only trims the range, not the file_size.
> > > > > > Or did I miss something?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Right, but TRIM_LEN() does:
> > > > >
> > > > >         if ((off) + (len) > (size))             \
> > > > >                 (len) = (size) - (off);         \
> > > > >
> > > > > ... where size is file_size. Hm?
> > > >
> > > > That only updates the range's length, not the file_size.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Yes, but it caps the range to within file_size.
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > The problem I'm trying to solve is that because the file_size is not
> > updated by zero range operations,
> > a following clone/dedupe/copy_range call will not be able to use a
> > range that crosses the old file size and goes up to the new file size.
> >
> > I.e. I'm not solving a problem where the range for those operations
> > (or any others) incorrectly crosses eof - that doesn't happen because
> > of the TRIM_* macros.
> >
> > Does it make sense now?
> >
>
> Not really. When is end_offset > file_size ever true in do_zero_range()?

Ok, I see what you mean now. It's the trimming before calling the zero
range function.
So we have a different type of problem - we never exercise zero range
operations that cross the current eof.

Patch updated in the next verson.

Thanks.

>
> Brian
>
> > Thanks.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > > Also, if you check the global style, you'll see that in the function
> > > > for every operation that can change file size we do update file_size
> > > > explicitly (e.g. do_preallocate(), and we call TRIM_OFF_LEN before
> > > > calling it as well).
> > > >
> > >
> > > do_preallocate() (fallocate) passes maxfilelen instead of file_size, as
> > > does write and mapwrite. Insert range uses TRIM_LEN() directly but also
> > > passes maxfilelen.
> > >
> > > Brian
> > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Brian
> > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Brian
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >       if (end_offset > biggest) {
> > > > > > > >               biggest = end_offset;
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > 2.11.0
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [PATCH 1/4] fsx: add missing file size update on zero range operations

[Eryu Guan]

On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 11:35:52AM +0100, fdmanana@kernel.org wrote:
> From: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
> 
> When a zero range operation increases the size of the test file we were
> not updating the global variable 'file_size' which tracks the current
> size of the test file. This variable is used to for example compute the
> offset for a source range of clone, dedupe and copy file range operations.
> 
> So just fix it by updating the 'file_size' global variable whenever a zero
> range operation does not use the keep size flag and its range goes beyond
> the current file size.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
> ---
>  ltp/fsx.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/ltp/fsx.c b/ltp/fsx.c
> index 9d598a4f..fa383c94 100644
> --- a/ltp/fsx.c
> +++ b/ltp/fsx.c
> @@ -1212,6 +1212,8 @@ do_zero_range(unsigned offset, unsigned length, int keep_size)
>  	}
>  
>  	end_offset = keep_size ? 0 : offset + length;
> +	if (!keep_size && end_offset > file_size)
> +		file_size = end_offset;

I think this should be done after we really excute fallocate(2),
otherwise we may return early below:

        if (testcalls <= simulatedopcount)                                                                                                                                                                                                     
	                return;

Thanks,
Eryu

>  
>  	if (end_offset > biggest) {
>  		biggest = end_offset;
> -- 
> 2.11.0
>