From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Namjae Jeon Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 2/10] xfs: Add support FALLOC_FL_INSERT_RANGE for fallocate Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 09:10:35 +0900 Message-ID: <000401cf7a09$3fb514c0$bf1f3e40$@samsung.com> References: <001401cf7984$4e3e1850$eaba48f0$@samsung.com> <20140527205959.GA26393@bfoster.bfoster> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: 'Dave Chinner' , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, 'Ashish Sangwan' , xfs@oss.sgi.com To: 'Brian Foster' Return-path: Received: from mailout1.samsung.com ([203.254.224.24]:16444 "EHLO mailout1.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751198AbaE1AKi (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 May 2014 20:10:38 -0400 Received: from epcpsbgr2.samsung.com (u142.gpu120.samsung.co.kr [203.254.230.142]) by mailout1.samsung.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-24.01 (7.0.4.24.0) 64bit (built Nov 17 2011)) with ESMTP id <0N69008PHCHOTO20@mailout1.samsung.com> for linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org; Wed, 28 May 2014 09:10:36 +0900 (KST) In-reply-to: <20140527205959.GA26393@bfoster.bfoster> Content-language: ko Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > > On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 05:18:57PM +0900, Namjae Jeon wrote: > > This patch implements fallocate's FALLOC_FL_INSERT_RANGE for XFS. > > > > 1) Make sure that both offset and len are block size aligned. > > 2) Update the i_size of inode by len bytes. > > 3) Compute the file's logical block number against offset. If the computed > > block number is not the starting block of the extent, split the extent > > such that the block number is the starting block of the extent. > > 4) Shift all the extents which are lying bewteen [offset, last allocated extent] > > towards right by len bytes. This step will make a hole of len bytes > > at offset. > > 5) Allocate unwritten extents for the hole created in step 4. > > > > Cc: Brian Foster > > Signed-off-by: Namjae Jeon > > Signed-off-by: Ashish Sangwan > > --- > > FYI, while I didn't notice any test failures so far, a run through some > of the generic xfstests do produce some assert failures and whatnot. I > noticed output from generic/013,091,127,263. I haven't looked at these > much at all so far, I just wanted to get them on the list... > > Namjae, I reproduced these issues running ./check -g auto with > CONFIG_XFS_WARN enabled for XFS (to warn on assert failures). Below is a > quick dump of output from generic/091, as an example. That one > reproduces consistently for me. We'll probably want to run through and > squash this and any others before this gets merged. Hi Brian. I will check this problem. Thanks for your help! > > Brian > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > xfs mailing list > > xfs@oss.sgi.com > > http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs