On 2024/4/26 22:14, Daeho Jeong wrote:
On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 3:35 AM Chao Yu <c...@kernel.org> wrote:
Otherwise, it breaks pinfile's sematics.
Cc: Daeho Jeong <daeh...@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <c...@kernel.org>
---
fs/f2fs/data.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
index bee1e45f76b8..e29000d83d52 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
@@ -1596,7 +1596,8 @@ int f2fs_map_blocks(struct inode *inode, struct
f2fs_map_blocks *map, int flag)
/* use out-place-update for direct IO under LFS mode */
if (map->m_may_create &&
- (is_hole || (f2fs_lfs_mode(sbi) && flag == F2FS_GET_BLOCK_DIO))) {
+ (is_hole || (flag == F2FS_GET_BLOCK_DIO && (f2fs_lfs_mode(sbi) &&
+ (!f2fs_sb_has_blkzoned(sbi) || !f2fs_is_pinned_file(inode)))))) {
if (unlikely(f2fs_cp_error(sbi))) {
err = -EIO;
goto sync_out;
--
2.40.1
So, we block overwrite io for the pinfile here.
I guess you mean we blocked append write for pinfile, right?
static ssize_t f2fs_file_write_iter(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *from)
{
...
if (f2fs_is_pinned_file(inode) &&
!f2fs_overwrite_io(inode, pos, count)) {
If !f2fs_overwrite_io() is true, it means it may trigger append write on
pinfile?
Thanks,
ret = -EIO;
goto out_unlock;
}
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
