From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E0807F3F for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 09:25:49 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F30C88F8052 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 07:25:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from newverein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id A17UjLfsSTn3k30W (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 07 Jan 2016 07:25:43 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 16:25:42 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] xfs: cancel COW in xfs_cancel_ioend Message-ID: <20160107152541.GA16982@lst.de> References: <1451822873-12969-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <1451822873-12969-4-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <20160105014310.GK28330@birch.djwong.org> <20160105104214.GA16310@infradead.org> <20160107003227.GB8015@birch.djwong.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160107003227.GB8015@birch.djwong.org> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Wed, Jan 06, 2016 at 04:32:27PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > Ok. I spent a couple of days trying to find all the places where we need to > delete CoW reservations (hole punch, truncate, etc.) and found some places > where the code was leaving reservations behind in the CoW fork (most notable > truncate). I also made the inode eviction code purge any CoW leftovers, so > that should all go away. Can you send that part out for NFS testing? > I also wrote some more xfstests that try to hit all the CoW-cancelling code > paths (fpunch, fzero, fcollapse, finsert, truncate, -EIO) to smoke test all > that. By the way, do you have a testcase handy for the "non-blocking writeback > EAGAIN" case? I'm guessing that we could hit that pretty easily by lowering > dirty_background_* and dirtying a lot of pages while reflinking? I did hit it pretty easily testing over NFS to a local nfs server with xfstests. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs