From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762848AbZE0OwV (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 May 2009 10:52:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756280AbZE0OwM (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 May 2009 10:52:12 -0400 Received: from cantor.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:53940 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750984AbZE0OwL (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 May 2009 10:52:11 -0400 Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 16:52:10 +0200 From: Jan Kara To: Theodore Tso , Jan Kara , LKML , npiggin@suse.de, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/11] ext4: Make sure blocks are properly allocated under mmaped page even when blocksize < pagesize Message-ID: <20090527145209.GG16006@duck.suse.cz> References: <1243429268-3028-1-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz> <1243429268-3028-6-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz> <20090527143006.GC10842@mit.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090527143006.GC10842@mit.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed 27-05-09 10:30:06, Theodore Tso wrote: > On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 03:01:02PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > In a situation like: > > truncate(f, 1024); > > a = mmap(f, 0, 4096); > > a[0] = 'a'; > > truncate(f, 4096); > > > > we end up with a dirty page which does not have all blocks allocated / > > reserved. Fix the problem by using new VFS infrastructure. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jan Kara > > Hi Jan, > > Have you tested with -o nodelalloc? There is apparently a problem > with ext4 when blocksize < pagesize which Aneesh has been working on. > He has been able to reproduce the problem, and theorized that an > earlier version your patch set would address the problem, but it > apparently did not. See: > > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13369 > > ... and Aneesh can provide more details. Aneesh, you might want to > try testing with this latest set and see if you can reproduce the > problem with this set. Yes, I've exchanged a few emails with Aneesh privately yesterday and today. There were bugs in my original patch set which should now be fixed. Hopefully it also fixes the bug Aneesh sees (it's definitely the type of bug this patch set should solve and if it does not I should fix it ;). Honza -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR