[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091209145713.GD7044@quack.suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:57:13 +0100
From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 4/5] ext2: convert to use the new truncate convention
On Tue 08-12-09 09:42:09, Nick Piggin wrote:
> I also have commented a possible bug in existing ext2 code, marked with XXX.
>
> Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
...
> @@ -752,8 +764,8 @@ int __ext2_write_begin(struct file *file
> loff_t pos, unsigned len, unsigned flags,
> struct page **pagep, void **fsdata)
> {
> - return block_write_begin(file, mapping, pos, len, flags, pagep, fsdata,
> - ext2_get_block);
> + return block_write_begin_newtrunc(file, mapping, pos, len, flags,
> + pagep, fsdata, ext2_get_block);
> }
OK, but you should update the code in dir.c using __ext2_write_begin,
shouldn't you?
> +static int ext2_write_end(struct file *file, struct address_space *mapping,
> + loff_t pos, unsigned len, unsigned copied,
> + struct page *page, void *fsdata)
> +{
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = generic_write_end(file, mapping, pos, len, copied, page, fsdata);
> + if (ret < len)
> + ext2_write_failed(mapping, pos + len);
> + return ret;
> }
OK, when doing this, please also update ext2_commit_chunk in dir.c...
> +static void ext2_truncate_blocks(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset)
> +{
> + /*
> + * XXX: it seems like a bug here that we don't allow
> + * IS_APPEND inode to have blocks-past-i_size trimmed off.
> + * review and fix this.
> + *
> + * Also would be nice to be able to handle IO errors and such,
> + * but that's probably too much to ask.
> + */
> + if (!(S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) || S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode) ||
> + S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode)))
> + return;
> + if (ext2_inode_is_fast_symlink(inode))
> + return;
> + if (IS_APPEND(inode) || IS_IMMUTABLE(inode))
> + return;
Yes, I'd remove IS_APPEND check from here.
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists