From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:34522 "EHLO newverein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750751AbeCNImW (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Mar 2018 04:42:22 -0400 Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 09:42:21 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] xfs: only clear preallocated COW blocks in xfs_reflink_clear_inode_flag Message-ID: <20180314084221.GC28480@lst.de> References: <20180313143601.30028-1-hch@lst.de> <20180313143601.30028-9-hch@lst.de> <20180313205604.GJ4865@magnolia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180313205604.GJ4865@magnolia> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: Christoph Hellwig , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 01:56:04PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 03:36:01PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Currently these are the only ones that should exist at this point anyway, > > but with O_ATOMIC writes we might have legit extents around in the COW > > fork even when clearing the reflink flag. > > Hmmm... so I assume that the premise of the O_ATOMIC write series is > still that we use the cow fork to stage writes until fsync, and the > presence of a cow fork is now separate from the reflink inode flag? Yes. > > Therefore, it's perfectly legit to have a !reflink inode with real > extents sitting in the cow fork and legit to be clearing the reflink > iflag with real extents sitting around. > > I think this is ok but I'd sure like to see the atomic writes patches > before I pull this one in. Ok. Skip if for now then.