From: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>
To: Zhiguo Niu <niuzhiguo84@gmail.com>
Cc: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>, Zhiguo Niu <zhiguo.niu@unisoc.com>,
jaegeuk@kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ke.wang@unisoc.com,
Hao_hao.Wang@unisoc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] f2fs: fix to adjust appropriate length for fiemap
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2024 18:39:27 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <22873055-370b-4240-83ff-96bcfa91413a@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHJ8P3L9o2RJgV=TtUf_MPj36wasgPn7bn9FnGPXu=TgpE7ATQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 2024/11/5 15:28, Zhiguo Niu wrote:
> Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org> 于2024年11月5日周二 15:04写道:
>>
>> On 2024/11/4 9:56, Zhiguo Niu wrote:
>>> If user give a file size as "length" parameter for fiemap
>>> operations, but if this size is non-block size aligned,
>>> it will show 2 segments fiemap results even this whole file
>>> is contiguous on disk, such as the following results:
>>>
>>> ./f2fs_io fiemap 0 19034 ylog/analyzer.py
>>> Fiemap: offset = 0 len = 19034
>>> logical addr. physical addr. length flags
>>> 0 0000000000000000 0000000020baa000 0000000000004000 00001000
>>> 1 0000000000004000 0000000020bae000 0000000000001000 00001001
>>>
>>> after this patch:
>>> ./f2fs_io fiemap 0 19034 ylog/analyzer.py
>>> Fiemap: offset = 0 len = 19034
>>> logical addr. physical addr. length flags
>>> 0 0000000000000000 00000000315f3000 0000000000005000 00001001
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Zhiguo Niu <zhiguo.niu@unisoc.com>
>>> ---
>>> V2: correct commit msg according to Chao's questions
>>> f2fs_io has been modified for testing, the length for fiemap is
>>> real file size, not block number
>>> ---
>>> fs/f2fs/data.c | 4 ++--
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
>>> index 306b86b0..9fc229d 100644
>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
>>> @@ -1966,8 +1966,8 @@ int f2fs_fiemap(struct inode *inode, struct fiemap_extent_info *fieinfo,
>>> goto out;
>>> }
>>>
>>> - if (bytes_to_blks(inode, len) == 0)
>>> - len = blks_to_bytes(inode, 1);
>>> + if (len & (blks_to_bytes(inode, 1) - 1))
>>> + len = round_up(len, blks_to_bytes(inode, 1));
>>
>> How do you think of getting rid of above alignment for len?
>>
>>>
>>> start_blk = bytes_to_blks(inode, start);
>>> last_blk = bytes_to_blks(inode, start + len - 1);
>>
>> And round up end position w/:
>>
>> last_blk = bytes_to_blks(inode, round_up(start + len - 1, F2FS_BLKSIZE));
> Hi Chao,
> I think this will change the current code logic
> -------------
> if (start_blk > last_blk)
> goto out;
> -------------
> for example, a file with size 19006, but the length from the user is 16384.
> before this modification, last_blk = bytes_to_blks(inode, start +
> len - 1) = (inode, 16383) = 3
> after the first f2fs_map_blocks(). start_blk change to be 4,
> after the second f2fs_map_blocks(), fiemap_fill_nex_exten will be
> called to fill user parameter and then
> will goto out because start_blk > last_blk, then fiemap flow finishes.
> but after this modification, last_blk will be 4
> will do f2fs_map_blocks() until reach the max_file_blocks(inode)
Yes, you're right, however, w/ this patch, it may change last_blk, e.g.
xfs_io file -c "fiemap -v 0 19006" vs xfs_io file -c "fiemap -v 2 19006"
start_blk and last_blk will be: 0, 4 and 0, 5.
Should we round_up len after start_blk & last_blk calculation?
Thanks,
> thanks!
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-11-05 10:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-11-04 1:56 [PATCH V2] f2fs: fix to adjust appropriate length for fiemap Zhiguo Niu
2024-11-05 3:15 ` Chao Yu
2024-11-05 4:02 ` Zhiguo Niu
2024-11-05 6:56 ` Chao Yu
2024-11-05 7:04 ` Chao Yu
2024-11-05 7:28 ` Zhiguo Niu
2024-11-05 10:39 ` Chao Yu [this message]
2024-11-05 11:02 ` Zhiguo Niu
2024-11-06 2:16 ` Chao Yu
2024-11-06 2:26 ` Zhiguo Niu
2024-11-06 2:40 ` Chao Yu
2024-11-06 2:54 ` Zhiguo Niu
2024-11-06 6:45 ` Chao Yu
2024-11-06 6:08 ` Zhiguo Niu
2024-11-06 7:40 ` Chao Yu
2024-11-06 8:41 ` Zhiguo Niu
2024-11-07 6:18 ` Chao Yu
2024-11-07 6:54 ` Zhiguo Niu
2024-11-07 8:22 ` Chao Yu
2024-11-07 10:53 ` Zhiguo Niu
2024-11-08 1:22 ` Chao Yu
2024-11-08 1:53 ` Zhiguo Niu
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=22873055-370b-4240-83ff-96bcfa91413a@kernel.org \
--to=chao@kernel.org \
--cc=Hao_hao.Wang@unisoc.com \
--cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
--cc=ke.wang@unisoc.com \
--cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=niuzhiguo84@gmail.com \
--cc=zhiguo.niu@unisoc.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