From: m00nb1rd lin <ljp1205831794@gmail.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: cem@kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org, djwong@kernel.org,
jiapenglin@tencent.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] xfs: fix exchange-range reflink flag clearing issue with INO1_WRITTEN
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2026 14:50:35 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b17cab0c-3804-4322-90f8-b163686f76cb@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <amgekiNKKoAdACnc@infradead.org>
在 2026/7/28 11:14, Christoph Hellwig 写道:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 10:23:03AM +0800, Lin Jiapeng wrote:
>> When exchanging two full-file ranges, xmi_can_exchange_reflink_flags()
>> can move the reflink inode flag from the file that currently has it to
>> the other file, as long as exactly one side is marked. This assumes
>> that the file contents, and therefore all shared extents, are exchanged.
>>
>> That assumption is not true when XFS_EXCHMAPS_INO1_WRITTEN is set.
>> xfs_exchmaps_can_skip_mapping() can skip hole and unwritten mappings
>> from file1, so an exchange can complete without moving every mapping
>> that the earlier flag-swap decision accounted for. In that case the
>> post-operation cleanup can clear the reflink flag from an inode that
>> still owns shared written extents. Later writes then take the
>> non-reflink write path and may update blocks that should still have
>> been protected by CoW, which shows up as data corruption between
>> reflink-related files.
>>
>> Fix this by disabling the reflink flag exchange whenever
>> XFS_EXCHMAPS_INO1_WRITTEN is requested. The contents exchange can still
>> proceed; the conservative outcome is that both inodes keep the reflink
>> flag. The regular reflink flag cleanup path can drop the extra flag
>> later once the inode no longer has shared extents.
>
> The fix looks good:
>
> Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
>
> Can you add a test case to fstests for this?
>
Thanks for the review. Sure, I'll add an fstests regression test and
send it separately.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-28 6:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-28 2:23 [PATCH v2] xfs: fix exchange-range reflink flag clearing issue with INO1_WRITTEN Lin Jiapeng
2026-07-28 3:14 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-07-28 6:50 ` m00nb1rd lin [this message]
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=b17cab0c-3804-4322-90f8-b163686f76cb@gmail.com \
--to=ljp1205831794@gmail.com \
--cc=cem@kernel.org \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jiapenglin@tencent.com \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@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