From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:45555 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752497AbcKOOQW (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Nov 2016 09:16:22 -0500 Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 06:16:21 -0800 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/4] xfs: clean up cow fork reservation and tag inodes correctly Message-ID: <20161115141621.GA18630@infradead.org> References: <1478636856-7590-1-git-send-email-bfoster@redhat.com> <1478636856-7590-2-git-send-email-bfoster@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1478636856-7590-2-git-send-email-bfoster@redhat.com> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: Brian Foster Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org > + if (imap->br_startoff != got.br_startoff || > + imap->br_blockcount != got.br_blockcount) > xfs_inode_set_cowblocks_tag(ip); Can't got.br_blockcount be smaller than imap->br_blockcount if we have an existing COW fork reservation lying around behind the whole we're filling? Also they way xfs_bmapi_reserve_delalloc works the startoff will be the same. E.g. this check should probably be: if (got.br_blockcount > imap->br_blockcount) Except for that the patch looks good and is a nice cleanup.