Do we need this?
On 09/16, Chao Yu wrote:
> Add a sanity check in __update_extent_tree_range() to detect any
> zero-sized extent update.
>
> Signed-off-by: wangzijie <wangzij...@honor.com>
> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <c...@kernel.org>
> ---
> fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c | 9 +++++++++
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c b/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c
> index 199c1e7a83ef..3070d1cb0676 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c
> @@ -664,6 +664,15 @@ static void __update_extent_tree_range(struct inode
> *inode,
> if (!et)
> return;
>
> + if (unlikely(len == 0)) {
> + f2fs_err_ratelimited(sbi, "%s: extent len is zero, type: %d, "
> + "extent [%u, %u, %u], age [%llu, %llu]",
> + __func__, type, tei->fofs, tei->blk, tei->len,
> + tei->age, tei->last_blocks);
> + f2fs_bug_on(sbi, 1);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> if (type == EX_READ)
> trace_f2fs_update_read_extent_tree_range(inode, fofs, len,
> tei->blk, 0);
> --
> 2.49.0
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
