From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8626C432C0 for ; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 23:41:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.sourceforge.net (lists.sourceforge.net [216.105.38.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C900222B0; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 23:41:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sourceforge.net header.i=@sourceforge.net header.b="Pl0BNalD"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sf.net header.i=@sf.net header.b="iTb5/gyd" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 7C900222B0 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=acm.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=sfs-ml-2.v29.lw.sourceforge.com) by sfs-ml-2.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iXD7L-00053L-DM; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 23:41:07 +0000 Received: from [172.30.20.202] (helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iXD7I-000537-OK for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 23:41:04 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceforge.net; s=x; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=LGdI8nMvJO9Yp2V4F8P1ev7tTWwm2jfSwnW1T5/k5as=; b=Pl0BNalDrX5c0tNYp/YuYUzma5 lUCzYXRP2s4JVFNdBqO60jZ3gCzL3w+SpGWkFTxqbVdxpzEKBblIeBJbtfMsxl0G4Z/3RCNjcqbkO vmXM/oRDlDt9RE5tB1i+tFif+dqs/ltMF3CmlVy6iUVsvoPj7hmitHaMr/ctggc6ndvY=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sf.net; s=x ; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=LGdI8nMvJO9Yp2V4F8P1ev7tTWwm2jfSwnW1T5/k5as=; b=iTb5/gydKPAbl3bXPDhmAXtUoe mV1Rbx50n/hwxVv54vgYKXtQXVB7yfiHsRWEXL+NGobgcWFqUi0aTlxf2QQgPFu2cE3I6WQYoj6Tw LcmTjLSW6nLPEtked0dA0k9Tbct/w5LE/K0tqbbGu0A8m01/heXzlZDUzq0T0agocvss=; Received: from mail-pl1-f196.google.com ([209.85.214.196]) by sfi-mx-3.v28.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92.2) id 1iXD7H-006Zpa-Bw for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 23:41:04 +0000 Received: by mail-pl1-f196.google.com with SMTP id d7so12851325pls.3 for ; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 15:41:03 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=LGdI8nMvJO9Yp2V4F8P1ev7tTWwm2jfSwnW1T5/k5as=; b=n+FLwVHxmZmDN3ySNqSpdb1tcQ+jue2uqJdMBJ0s/eH/oMXz+yH6+5oxRk+X7lHy7p 19YwJfeh6t60ui9XG1zl4cgxlp7uWqMRGaQjz3DOU+3MEqlfmyOx12Tk1aNZADAXHa15 r4N+71zcpcEXpDwY5M9fK8xFEjc/zqm0Rm2z0Qj9J4zEp8d1bk67emWIdaaF+8Tk8mvZ I5o2gzm7Wp0Lh3JPr2fsfFWLmAYaZP8PtuHVMkarCDkF4tDB3CJsT3ssWmc0hPrHO1Tq WIFm+WX2bJse8rBuY60k1hxqQbdARm6wxR0Ji4PVQYePh7pySiw/PVHPsxvknDfnM1n2 O7Bw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAW/H0Je+EjT3NPpV1vhYgbQiIkYBvhabcdPnYa/EALvhRhs0RPs q35sSWJflQkuSLA6fV4DlMsPadfkG1o= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxaqRKCdfDH6V8YoUt6s/ImovXm0GCKDyXavhCF1NO0+J23GblS0JEL8I94w3YrZSAKQMm05Q== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:bd95:: with SMTP id z21mr246817pjr.10.1574206857435; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 15:40:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from desktop-bart.svl.corp.google.com ([2620:15c:2cd:202:4308:52a3:24b6:2c60]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x192sm29727552pfd.96.2019.11.19.15.40.56 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 19 Nov 2019 15:40:56 -0800 (PST) To: Jaegeuk Kim , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net References: <20190518004751.18962-1-jaegeuk@kernel.org> <20190518005304.GA19446@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> From: Bart Van Assche Message-ID: <1e1aae74-bd6b-dddb-0c88-660aac33872c@acm.org> Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2019 15:40:55 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190518005304.GA19446@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> Content-Language: en-US X-Headers-End: 1iXD7H-006Zpa-Bw Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH v2] loop: avoid EAGAIN, if offset or block_size are changed X-BeenThere: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Jens Axboe , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On 5/17/19 5:53 PM, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > This patch tries to avoid EAGAIN due to nrpages!=0 that was originally trying > to drop stale pages resulting in wrong data access. > > Report: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=938958#c38 Please provide a more detailed commit description. What is wrong with the current implementation and why is the new behavior considered the correct behavior? This patch moves draining code from before the following comment to after that comment: /* I/O need to be drained during transfer transition */ Is that comment still correct or should it perhaps be updated? Thanks, Bart. _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel