From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com>
Cc: Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@samsung.com>,
zlang@redhat.com, fstests@vger.kernel.org, hch@lst.de,
djwong@kernel.org, yi.zhang@huawei.com, pankaj.raghav@linux.dev,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] generic/795: add unaligned boundary test cases for WRITE_ZEROES
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2026 07:10:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260707051015.GA13010@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ca21b3c4-e1df-4ba7-8e9c-5d221337c86b@huaweicloud.com>
On Tue, Jul 07, 2026 at 11:08:39AM +0800, Zhang Yi wrote:
> > +# WRITE_ZEROES must leave the whole requested range backed by *written*
> > +# (zeroed) extents while preserving the out-of-range bytes of the partial
> > +# boundary units. The possible scenarios are: written_edges, hole_edges,
> > +# unwritten_edges and delalloc_edges.
>
> unwritten_edges needs to distinguish between dirty and clean scenarios.
> The expected result for clean should be tmp.zero, while the expected
> result for dirty should be tmp.pattern.
Does it? I'd expect everything in the range to be zeroed, and everything
outside to be left alone, as the dirty state is just an imlementation
detail not visible to the user. Similar to other falloc operations,
I'd expect the file system to write back any boundary block first
to make the dirty state difference moot.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-07 5:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-03 12:54 [PATCH] generic/795: add unaligned boundary test cases for WRITE_ZEROES Pankaj Raghav
2026-07-07 3:08 ` Zhang Yi
2026-07-07 5:10 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2026-07-07 6:38 ` Zhang Yi
2026-07-08 13:21 ` Pankaj Raghav
2026-07-09 2:32 ` Zhang Yi
2026-07-09 7:55 ` Pankaj Raghav
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=20260707051015.GA13010@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=p.raghav@samsung.com \
--cc=pankaj.raghav@linux.dev \
--cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
--cc=yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=zlang@redhat.com \
/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