Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [RFC NO MERGE] f2fs: extent cache: support unaligned extent
To:     Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
Cc:     linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Chao Yu <chao.yu@linux.dev>
References: <20210707015815.1978-1-chao@kernel.org>
 <YQRQ4kHvdRTBnb10@google.com>
 <51565c85-a475-bcb8-bbb2-e3125c5223a3@kernel.org>
 <YQgziuikMr0fvlT7@google.com>
From:   Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>
Message-ID: <3256dc39-2a82-cb60-038b-69e262c32d18@kernel.org>
Date:   Tue, 3 Aug 2021 09:07:22 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.12.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <YQgziuikMr0fvlT7@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 2021/8/3 2:03, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On 08/01, Chao Yu wrote:
>> On 2021/7/31 3:20, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>>> On 07/07, Chao Yu wrote:
>>>> Currently, it only works in readonly format f2fs image.
>>
>> There wouldn't be any race condition because unaligned extent only works
>> for ro feature now?
> 
> Isn't your patch proposing on writable partition?

Please check description in patch message, now it was designed only for
compression case w/ ro feature, let's check and support rw partition later.

Thanks,

> 
>>
>>> Is there any race condition between the address in extent_cache and the one in
>>> dnode? I feel that we could synchronize it by locking its dnode block.
>>
>> Thanks,