Received: by 2002:a25:1506:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 6csp1428923ybv; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 20:18:05 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwWk/TfPy0q7Y1STBkdw/sHqPr04AmYpZuC7kslOz77qz4nXnVsUHE8xcOAThFWOA4emKkl X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:124b:: with SMTP id s11mr25899215otp.333.1582258684990; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 20:18:04 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1582258684; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=yzFbrzU7GRPKABnoJpb8VXzka4bYQ5L60ge9IwX3AqZdy6Y9zs9Jn1arhc+Z/o2vOq Z4T0yfcIihBuPrJXTjkQPd8xnlKcek02si16jxXAUU6dSNDR02rRt+r6MFSgLZo4j9oO RL/4yv/KziN6xEpN/ar9fFU0E/Hk5OlcW7KQM6RkhZk1AyUIeyDOnGcbvtWzQKVIm+2W RoW1Kleemg+72XTa2NrkEmIfD19b/2K2fgjDiuwPtF8bamMURYaZKUjZVzuDGSvuinlB v7zXJGnfXbTZljJ+A+68UfXcXufT0+m2dT4P632555u0XCa0z0HnsDZ1J4ttabTAwOMh sOfQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:message-id:content-transfer-encoding :content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date:from :references:cc:to:subject; bh=h38hKOykmVVV8lUd9/SQLdwUdO0e9v8gtnvzcZfsghM=; b=Iguwh3P798zzmxDR2UDtd/dyi48drd336fH60RxqD1DZf4iUKqAR6/Q1bFFTbiy3O7 xaFzdHIsASK9HcppnvZffVCoq9jOwriA0Lr0TjTz0e9guqCg35SnupSp3K9BWFppCSsn TM93RsWDlx7OWnjuJCc0cLmCzBDK9sdTZ9Fqa6xZD4ewZBjQs9b79itsJDwSKyOouJC1 vxTHn2dFOM2LgJZ94zMovdIK+kT22HGKiiHKVf+P3DfMnLbUuAGkmprTQ5G9WQuSeSAR hM71KHTGesN20m+HdKpj5ITywWmK84r/qwbHEcISI8E0ikLwrYTzVXdBA/ui4IwtqDWA ifXg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id m24si988257otn.67.2020.02.20.20.17.53; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 20:18:04 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729765AbgBUEQx (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 20 Feb 2020 23:16:53 -0500 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:60662 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729625AbgBUEQx (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Feb 2020 23:16:53 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098413.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 01L4DgG4094911 for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 23:16:52 -0500 Received: from e06smtp04.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp04.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.100]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2y93kgnh0b-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 23:16:51 -0500 Received: from localhost by e06smtp04.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 21 Feb 2020 04:16:50 -0000 Received: from b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.194) by e06smtp04.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.134) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Fri, 21 Feb 2020 04:16:46 -0000 Received: from d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.232]) by b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 01L4GjSd60424362 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 21 Feb 2020 04:16:46 GMT Received: from d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id DECAC52057; Fri, 21 Feb 2020 04:16:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.199.159.36] (unknown [9.199.159.36]) by d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53A9852052; Fri, 21 Feb 2020 04:16:44 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [RFCv2 0/4] ext4: bmap & fiemap conversion to use iomap To: Christoph Hellwig , Jan Kara , tytso@mit.edu Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" , adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, cmaiolino@redhat.com References: <20200130160018.GC3445353@magnolia> <20200205124750.AE9DDA404D@d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com> <20200205155733.GH6874@magnolia> <20200206052619.D4BBCA405F@b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com> <20200206102254.GK14001@quack2.suse.cz> <20200220170304.80C3E52051@d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com> <20200220170953.GA11221@infradead.org> From: Ritesh Harjani Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2020 09:46:43 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200220170953.GA11221@infradead.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 20022104-0016-0000-0000-000002E8D171 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 20022104-0017-0000-0000-0000334BF058 Message-Id: <20200221041644.53A9852052@d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138,18.0.572 definitions=2020-02-20_19:2020-02-19,2020-02-20 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=739 impostorscore=0 priorityscore=1501 adultscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2001150001 definitions=main-2002210028 Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org On 2/20/20 10:39 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 10:33:03PM +0530, Ritesh Harjani wrote: >> So I was making some changes along the above lines and I think we can take >> below approach for filesystem which could determine the >> _EXTENT_LAST relatively easily and for cases if it cannot >> as Jan also mentioned we could keep the current behavior as is and let >> iomap core decide the last disk extent. > > Well, given that _EXTENT_LAST never worked properly on any file system > since it was added this actually changes behavior and could break > existing users. I'd rather update the documentation to match reality > rather than writing a lot of code for a feature no one obviously cared > about for years. Well I agree to this. Since either ways the _EXTENT_LAST has never worked properly or in the same manner across different filesystems. In ext4 itself it works differently for extent v/s non-extent based FS. So updating the documentation would be a right way to go from here. Ted/Jan - do you agree here:- Shall we move ahead with this patch series in converting ext4_fiemap to use iomap APIs, without worrying about how _EXTENT_LAST is being set via iomap core code? -ritesh