On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 11:39:17AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> Looks ok, but need fixes tag. Also, might it be wise to split off the
> ext4 section into a separate patch so that it can be backported
> separately?
I'll let Dave handle all that. I've just pulled it in here as multiple
patches
On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 10:08:14AM +1100, Matthew Bobrowski wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 08:56:13AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 11:39:17AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 07:56:11PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > > From: Dave
On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 08:56:13AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 11:39:17AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 07:56:11PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > From: Dave Chinner
> > >
> > > When doing a direct IO that spans the current EOF, and
On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 11:39:17AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 07:56:11PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > From: Dave Chinner
> >
> > When doing a direct IO that spans the current EOF, and there are
> > written blocks beyond EOF that extend beyond the current
On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 07:56:11PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> From: Dave Chinner
>
> When doing a direct IO that spans the current EOF, and there are
> written blocks beyond EOF that extend beyond the current write, the
> only metadata update that needs to be done is a file size
From: Dave Chinner
When doing a direct IO that spans the current EOF, and there are
written blocks beyond EOF that extend beyond the current write, the
only metadata update that needs to be done is a file size extension.
However, we don't mark such iomaps as IOMAP_F_DIRTY to indicate that
there
6 matches
Mail list logo