public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] xfs: flush eof folio before insert range size update
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2025 14:15:31 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251105221531.GG196370@frogsfrogsfrogs> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aQtughoBHt6LRTUx@bfoster>

On Wed, Nov 05, 2025 at 10:34:26AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 04, 2025 at 04:14:45PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 16, 2025 at 03:03:00PM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> > > The flush in xfs_buffered_write_iomap_begin() for zero range over a
> > > data fork hole fronted by COW fork prealloc is primarily designed to
> > > provide correct zeroing behavior in particular pagecache conditions.
> > > As it turns out, this also partially masks some odd behavior in
> > > insert range (via zero range via setattr).
> > > 
> > > Insert range bumps i_size the length of the new range, flushes,
> > > unmaps pagecache and cancels COW prealloc, and then right shifts
> > > extents from the end of the file back to the target offset of the
> > > insert. Since the i_size update occurs before the pagecache flush,
> > > this creates a transient situation where writeback around EOF can
> > > behave differently.
> > 
> > Why not flush the file from @offset to EOF, flush the COW
> > preallocations, extend i_size, and only then start shifting extents?
> > That would seem a lot more straightforward to me.
> > 
> 
> I agree. I noted in the cover letter that I started with this approach
> of reordering the existing sequence of operations, but the factoring
> looked ugly enough that I stopped and wanted to solicit input.
> 
> The details of that fell out of my brain since I posted this,
> unfortunately. I suspect it may have been related to layering or
> something wrt the prepare_shift factoring, but I'll take another look in
> that direction for v2 and once I've got some feedback on the rest of the
> series.. Thanks.

I'm guessing that you want me to keep going with the other three
patches, then? :)

--D

> Brian
> 
> > --D
> > 
> > > This appears to be corner case situation, but if happens to be
> > > fronted by COW fork speculative preallocation and a large, dirty
> > > folio that contains at least one full COW block beyond EOF, the
> > > writeback after i_size is bumped may remap that COW fork block into
> > > the data fork within EOF. The block is zeroed and then shifted back
> > > out to post-eof, but this is unexpected in that it leads to a
> > > written post-eof data fork block. This can cause a zero range
> > > warning on a subsequent size extension, because we should never find
> > > blocks that require physical zeroing beyond i_size.
> > > 
> > > To avoid this quirk, flush the EOF folio before the i_size update
> > > during insert range. The entire range will be flushed, unmapped and
> > > invalidated anyways, so this should be relatively unnoticeable.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
> > > ---
> > >  fs/xfs/xfs_file.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
> > > index 5b9864c8582e..cc3a9674ad40 100644
> > > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
> > > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
> > > @@ -1226,6 +1226,23 @@ xfs_falloc_insert_range(
> > >  	if (offset >= isize)
> > >  		return -EINVAL;
> > >  
> > > +	/*
> > > +	 * Let writeback clean up EOF folio state before we bump i_size. The
> > > +	 * insert flushes before it starts shifting and under certain
> > > +	 * circumstances we can write back blocks that should technically be
> > > +	 * considered post-eof (and thus should not be submitted for writeback).
> > > +	 *
> > > +	 * For example, a large, dirty folio that spans EOF and is backed by
> > > +	 * post-eof COW fork preallocation can cause block remap into the data
> > > +	 * fork. This shifts back out beyond EOF, but creates an expectedly
> > > +	 * written post-eof block. The insert is going to flush, unmap and
> > > +	 * cancel prealloc across this whole range, so flush EOF now before we
> > > +	 * bump i_size to provide consistent behavior.
> > > +	 */
> > > +	error = filemap_write_and_wait_range(inode->i_mapping, isize, isize);
> > > +	if (error)
> > > +		return error;
> > > +
> > >  	error = xfs_falloc_setsize(file, isize + len);
> > >  	if (error)
> > >  		return error;
> > > -- 
> > > 2.51.0
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2025-11-05 22:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-10-16 19:02 [PATCH 0/6] iomap, xfs: improve zero range flushing and lookup Brian Foster
2025-10-16 19:02 ` [PATCH 1/6] iomap: replace folio_batch allocation with stack allocation Brian Foster
2025-11-05  0:07   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-11-05 15:27     ` Brian Foster
2025-11-05 21:41       ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-11-06 15:51         ` Brian Foster
2025-11-06 15:58           ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-10-16 19:02 ` [PATCH 2/6] iomap, xfs: lift zero range hole mapping flush into xfs Brian Foster
2025-11-05  0:31   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-11-05 15:33     ` Brian Foster
2025-11-05 22:23       ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-11-06 15:52         ` Brian Foster
2025-11-06 23:32           ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-11-07 13:52             ` Brian Foster
2025-11-07 13:59             ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-07 13:57           ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-07 13:55         ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-10-16 19:03 ` [PATCH 3/6] xfs: flush eof folio before insert range size update Brian Foster
2025-11-05  0:14   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-11-05 15:34     ` Brian Foster
2025-11-05 22:15       ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2025-11-18 20:08       ` Brian Foster
2025-10-16 19:03 ` [PATCH 4/6] xfs: look up cow fork extent earlier for buffered iomap_begin Brian Foster
2025-11-05 22:26   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-10-16 19:03 ` [PATCH 5/6] xfs: only flush when COW fork blocks overlap data fork holes Brian Foster
2025-10-16 19:03 ` [PATCH 6/6] xfs: replace zero range flush with folio batch Brian Foster
2025-11-05 22:37   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-11-06 15:53     ` Brian Foster

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20251105221531.GG196370@frogsfrogsfrogs \
    --to=djwong@kernel.org \
    --cc=bfoster@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox