From: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@sgi.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: xfs_bmap_add_attrfork_local is too generic
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 15:19:49 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <511D54F5.2080107@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1360558693-20354-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com>
On 02/10/13 22:58, Dave Chinner wrote:
> From: Dave Chinner<dchinner@redhat.com>
>
> When we are converting local data to an extent format as a result of
> adding an attribute, the type of data contained in the local fork
> determines the behaviour that needs to occur.
>
> xfs_bmap_add_attrfork_local() already handles the directory data
> case specially by using S_ISDIR() and calling out to
> xfs_dir2_sf_to_block(), but with verifiers we now need to handle
> each different type of metadata specially and different metadata
> formats require different verifiers (and eventually block header
> initialisation).
>
> There is only a single place that we add and attribute fork to
> the inode, but that is in the attribute code and it knows nothing
> about the specific contents of the data fork. It is only the case of
> local data that is the issue here, so adding code to hadnle this
> case in the attribute specific code is wrong. Hence we are really
> stuck trying to detect the data fork contents in
> xfs_bmap_add_attrfork_local() and performing the correct callout
> there.
>
> Luckily the current cases can be determined by S_IS* macros, and we
> can push the work off to data specific callouts, but each of those
> callouts does a lot of work in common with
> xfs_bmap_local_to_extents(). The only reason that this fails for
> symlinks right now is is that xfs_bmap_local_to_extents() assumes
> the data fork contains extent data, and so attaches a a bmap extent
> data verifier to the buffer and simply copies the data fork
> information straight into it.
>
> To fix this, allow us to pass a "formatting" callback into
> xfs_bmap_local_to_extents() which is responsible for setting the
> buffer type, initialising it and copying the data fork contents over
> to the new buffer. This allows callers to specify how they want to
> format the new buffer (which is necessary for the upcoming CRC
> enabled metadata blocks) and hence make xfs_bmap_local_to_extents()
> useful for any type of data fork content.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner<dchinner@redhat.com>
> ---
Looks good.
Reviewed-by: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@sgi.com>
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-14 21:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-02-11 4:58 [PATCH] xfs: xfs_bmap_add_attrfork_local is too generic Dave Chinner
2013-02-14 21:19 ` Mark Tinguely [this message]
2013-02-14 23:42 ` Ben Myers
2013-02-28 0:10 ` Dave Chinner
2013-02-28 15:26 ` Ben Myers
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=511D54F5.2080107@sgi.com \
--to=tinguely@sgi.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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