linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: cmm@us.ibm.com, tytso@mit.edu, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] ext4: Clear the unwritten buffer_head flag properly
Date: Thu, 07 May 2009 10:36:49 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A030011.7040901@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1241692770-22547-2-git-send-email-aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> ext4_get_blocks_wrap does a block lookup requesting to
> allocate new blocks. A lookup of blocks in prealloc area
> result in setting the unwritten flag in buffer_head. So
> a write to an unwritten extent will cause the buffer_head
> to have unwritten and mapped flag set. Clear hte unwritten
> buffer_head flag before requesting to allocate blocks.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
>  fs/ext4/inode.c |    7 +++++++
>  1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> index c3cd00f..f6d7e9b 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> @@ -1149,6 +1149,7 @@ int ext4_get_blocks_wrap(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode, sector_t block,
>  	int retval;
>  
>  	clear_buffer_mapped(bh);
> +	clear_buffer_unwritten(bh);
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * Try to see if we can get  the block without requesting
> @@ -1179,6 +1180,12 @@ int ext4_get_blocks_wrap(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode, sector_t block,
>  		return retval;
>  
>  	/*
> +	 * The above get_blocks can cause the buffer to be
> +	 * marked unwritten. So clear the same.
> +	 */
> +	clear_buffer_unwritten(bh);

hm, thinking out loud here.

ext4_ext_get_blocks() will only set unwritten if (!create) ... but then
ext4_get_blocks_wrap() calls ext4_ext_get_blocks() !create as an
argument no matter what, the first time, for an initial lookup.

But if ext4_get_blocks_wrap() was called with !create, then we return
regardless, so ok - by the time you get to the above hunk, we -are- in
create mode, we're planning to write it ... so I guess clearing the
unwritten state makes sense here.

But is this too late, because it's after this?

        /*
         * Returns if the blocks have already allocated
         *
         * Note that if blocks have been preallocated
         * ext4_ext_get_block() returns th create = 0
         * with buffer head unmapped.
         */
        if (retval > 0 && buffer_mapped(bh))
                return retval;

I guess not; ext4_ext_get_blocks() won't map the buffer if it's found to
be preallocated/unwritten because it was called with !create.  If we're
going on to write it, we want to clear unwritten.

So I guess this looks right, although I can't help but think that in
general, the buffer_head state management is really getting to be a
hard-to-follow mess...

-Eric

  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-05-07 15:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-05-07 10:39 [PATCH 1/3] ext4: Properly initialize the buffer_head state Aneesh Kumar K.V
2009-05-07 10:39 ` [PATCH 2/3] ext4: Clear the unwritten buffer_head flag properly Aneesh Kumar K.V
2009-05-07 10:39   ` [PATCH 3/3] vfs: Add BUG_ON for delayed and unwritten extents in submit_bh Aneesh Kumar K.V
2009-05-07 15:37     ` Eric Sandeen
2009-05-12  3:17     ` Theodore Tso
2009-05-12  4:52       ` [PATCH 3/3] vfs: Add BUG_ON for delayed and unwritten extentsin submit_bh Aneesh Kumar K.V
2009-05-12 13:25         ` Eric Sandeen
2009-05-07 15:36   ` Eric Sandeen [this message]
2009-05-08  8:12     ` [PATCH 2/3] ext4: Clear the unwritten buffer_head flag properly Aneesh Kumar K.V
2009-05-12  3:08   ` Theodore Tso
2009-05-12  4:46     ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2009-05-13 18:56       ` Eric Sandeen
2009-05-13 22:28         ` Theodore Tso
2009-05-14  6:00           ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2009-05-14  5:40         ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2009-05-14 13:14           ` Theodore Tso
2009-05-07 15:20 ` [PATCH 1/3] ext4: Properly initialize the buffer_head state Eric Sandeen
2009-05-10 23:57   ` Theodore Tso
2009-05-11  9:24     ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2009-05-11 11:31       ` Theodore Tso
2009-05-11 14:49     ` Eric Sandeen
2009-05-12  3:17 ` Theodore Tso
2009-05-12  4:47   ` Aneesh Kumar K.V

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=4A030011.7040901@redhat.com \
    --to=sandeen@redhat.com \
    --cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=cmm@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).