>
> Fine to me.
>
> But another question is, now it allows GC to migrate blocks belong
> to atomic files, so, during migration, it may update extent cache,
> once largest extent was updated, it will mark inode dirty, but after
> this patch, it may lose the extent change? thoughts?
>

Oh, I missed that case. Maybe we could prevent updating the i_size of
atomic files in f2fs_update_inode() while allowing inode dirtying.


_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

Reply via email to