Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753527Ab3FTG2N (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Jun 2013 02:28:13 -0400 Received: from mail-pb0-f48.google.com ([209.85.160.48]:63337 "EHLO mail-pb0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751265Ab3FTG2M (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Jun 2013 02:28:12 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87txkvjpde.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> References: <1367107703-2665-1-git-send-email-linkinjeon@gmail.com> <87ppxd4ddm.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> <87bo8v42wx.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> <87vc722cdu.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> <87r4hp3kax.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> <87k3nh3jzi.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> <87fvy53eun.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> <87txkvjpde.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 15:28:11 +0900 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v5] fat: editions to support fat_fallocate From: Namjae Jeon To: OGAWA Hirofumi Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Namjae Jeon , Amit Sahrawat Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1645 Lines: 38 2013/6/19, OGAWA Hirofumi : > Namjae Jeon writes: > >>>If above is correct, right implement to change get_block(). >> Now when we try to write in the fallocated region ( with keep size) in >> the fat_write_begin when it is called first time it checks that the >> mismatch is present between the mmu_private and mmu_actual , and hence >> zero out the region ; since buffer_new is not set for fallocated >> region by fat_get_block , we explicitly zero out the lseeked region >> using "fat_zero_falloc_area" and normal write occurs beyond that , and >> i_size is updated accordingly , and as such there is no need to move >> the code to fat_get_block . > > OK. So, like I said, you *changed* the behavior of get_block() via > fallocate() change, right? (I think, now, you noticed fat_get_block() > was changed.) Since you changed the behavior of get_block(), you had to > hack write_begin(). (IMO, that patch is dirty hack to fix write_begin() > path only) > > Likewise, you have to prove all callers of get_block() must work > collectedly with that change. > Hi OGAWA. > What happen on direct I/O, bmap ioctl, etc.? Well, anyway, please fix > the root cause of change of behavior. Good point! Yes, I didn't consider direct I/O and bmap yet. Sure, I will fix it. Thanks for review :) > > Thanks. > -- > OGAWA Hirofumi > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/