Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-197066-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Date: Fri, 31 May 2024 08:29:22 -0700
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com>, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	brauner@kernel.org, david@fromorbit.com, chandanbabu@kernel.org,
	jack@suse.cz, willy@infradead.org, yi.zhang@huawei.com,
	chengzhihao1@huawei.com, yukuai3@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 7/8] xfs: reserve blocks for truncating realtime
 inode
Message-ID: <20240531152922.GN52987@frogsfrogsfrogs>
References: <20240529095206.2568162-1-yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com>
 <20240529095206.2568162-8-yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com>
 <ZlnFvWsvfrR1HBZW@infradead.org>
 <20240531141000.GH52987@frogsfrogsfrogs>
 <Zlna8S76sbj-6ItP@infradead.org>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Zlna8S76sbj-6ItP@infradead.org>

On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 07:13:05AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 07:10:00AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 05:42:37AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > > -	error = xfs_trans_alloc(mp, &M_RES(mp)->tr_itruncate, 0, 0, 0, &tp);
> > > > +	resblks = XFS_IS_REALTIME_INODE(ip) ? XFS_DIOSTRAT_SPACE_RES(mp, 0) : 0;
> > > 
> > > This probably wants a comment explaining that we need the block
> > > reservation for bmap btree block allocations / splits that can happen
> > > because we can split a written extent into one written and one
> > > unwritten, while for the data fork we'll always just shorten or
> > > remove extents.
> > 
> > "for the data fork"? <confused>
> > 
> > This always runs on the data fork.  Did you mean "for files with alloc
> > unit > 1 fsblock"?
> 
> Sorry, it was meant to say for the data device.  My whole journey
> to check if this could get called for the attr fork twisted my mind.

I really hope not -- all writes to the attr fork have known sizes at
syscall time, and appending doesn't even make sense.

> But you have a good point that even for the rt device we only need
> the reservation for an rtextsize > 1.

<nod>

--D