From: Marco Stornelli Subject: Re: Bug in ext4/btrfs fallocate? Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2010 10:02:27 +0100 Message-ID: <4D1AF923.1090502@gmail.com> References: <4D1A0B1C.70406@gmail.com> <6A86E6B8-E14E-484B-BBF5-F3C580337661@dilger.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel , Linux FS Devel , tytso@mit.edu, chris.mason@oracle.com To: Andreas Dilger Return-path: In-Reply-To: <6A86E6B8-E14E-484B-BBF5-F3C580337661@dilger.ca> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org Il 29/12/2010 07:46, Andreas Dilger ha scritto: > On 2010-12-28, at 09:06, Marco Stornelli wrote: >> it seems that ext4/btrfs code for fallocate doesn't check for >> immutable/append inode flag. > > fallocate() probably shouldn't be allowed for immutable files, but it makes a lot of sense to call fallocate() on append-only files to avoid fragmentation, though it should only be called with the KEEP_SIZE flag. > > Cheers, Andreas > It seems that only ocfs2 does that check, however I think not checking for immutable flag is an error, for the append case maybe you're right, doing this operation on append-only files has got sense. Marco