From: Chi Zhiling <chizhiling@163.com>
To: exfat@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Yuezhang.Mo@sony.com, chenxiaosong@chenxiaosong.com,
dxdt@dev.snart.me, hyc.lee@gmail.com, linkinjeon@kernel.org,
liubaolin12138@163.com, sj1557.seo@samsung.com,
Chi Zhiling <chizhiling@kylinos.cn>
Subject: [PATCH v2 5/7] exfat: publish valid_size under the folio lock for buffered writes
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2026 11:30:30 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261003033032.1775311-6-chizhiling@163.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261003033032.1775311-1-chizhiling@163.com>
From: Chi Zhiling <chizhiling@kylinos.cn>
Buffered writes currently advance valid_size from
exfat_write_iomap_end(), which runs after the folio has been unlocked.
A folio that is beyond valid_size can therefore become uptodate and
dirty, and be observed by writeback or reclaim, while valid_size still
points below it.
If reclaim picks such a folio, the page can be dropped while the range is
still marked as a hole. A later read of that range is then treated as a
hole as well and is zero-filled without touching the disk. Once that
zero-filled page is written back, the zeros overwrite the data that was
just written, even though valid_size is advanced afterwards, so the write
is silently lost on disk.
Publish valid_size from the buffered write path while the folio is still
locked, via an iomap put_folio callback, so it is never smaller than any
folio writeback can see. Mark the inode dirty once the write advances
valid_size; the direct I/O path continues to advance it from ->iomap_end.
Signed-off-by: Chi Zhiling <chizhiling@kylinos.cn>
---
fs/exfat/file.c | 8 ++++++--
fs/exfat/iomap.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
fs/exfat/iomap.h | 1 +
3 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/exfat/file.c b/fs/exfat/file.c
index b2940732812a..6bd2b6d28a82 100644
--- a/fs/exfat/file.c
+++ b/fs/exfat/file.c
@@ -751,7 +751,7 @@ static ssize_t exfat_fallback_buffered_write(struct kiocb *iocb,
iocb->ki_flags &= ~IOCB_DIRECT;
written = iomap_file_buffered_write(iocb, from, &exfat_write_iomap_ops,
- NULL, NULL);
+ &exfat_iomap_write_ops, NULL);
if (written < 0)
return written;
@@ -837,10 +837,14 @@ static ssize_t exfat_file_write_iter(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *iter)
ret = exfat_dio_write_iter(iocb, iter);
else
ret = iomap_file_buffered_write(iocb, iter,
- &exfat_write_iomap_ops, NULL, NULL);
+ &exfat_write_iomap_ops, &exfat_iomap_write_ops,
+ NULL);
if (ret < 0)
goto unlock;
+ if (exfat_get_valid_size(ei) > valid_size)
+ mark_inode_dirty(inode);
+
inode_unlock(inode);
if (iocb->ki_pos > pos) {
diff --git a/fs/exfat/iomap.c b/fs/exfat/iomap.c
index 291367e10c1e..4ed64c67070e 100644
--- a/fs/exfat/iomap.c
+++ b/fs/exfat/iomap.c
@@ -221,6 +221,22 @@ const struct iomap_ops exfat_write_iomap_ops = {
.iomap_next = exfat_write_iomap_next,
};
+static void exfat_iomap_put_folio(struct inode *inode, loff_t pos,
+ unsigned int copied, struct folio *folio)
+{
+ struct exfat_inode_info *ei = EXFAT_I(inode);
+
+ if (copied)
+ exfat_advance_valid_size(ei, pos + copied);
+
+ folio_unlock(folio);
+ folio_put(folio);
+}
+
+const struct iomap_write_ops exfat_iomap_write_ops = {
+ .put_folio = exfat_iomap_put_folio,
+};
+
/*
* exfat_writeback_range - Map folio during writeback
*
diff --git a/fs/exfat/iomap.h b/fs/exfat/iomap.h
index fd8a913f7794..39c93f8cd790 100644
--- a/fs/exfat/iomap.h
+++ b/fs/exfat/iomap.h
@@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
extern const struct iomap_dio_ops exfat_write_dio_ops;
extern const struct iomap_ops exfat_iomap_ops;
extern const struct iomap_ops exfat_write_iomap_ops;
+extern const struct iomap_write_ops exfat_iomap_write_ops;
extern const struct iomap_writeback_ops exfat_writeback_ops;
extern const struct iomap_read_ops exfat_iomap_bio_read_ops;
--
2.53.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-03 3:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-03 3:30 [PATCH v2 0/7] exfat: fix valid_size handling and locking Chi Zhiling
2026-10-03 3:30 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] exfat: advance valid_size to EOF for append writes Chi Zhiling
2026-10-03 3:30 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] exfat: hold the invalidate lock while truncating Chi Zhiling
2026-10-03 3:30 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] exfat: dirty all new pages when extending valid_size Chi Zhiling
2026-10-03 3:30 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] exfat: make valid_size and zeroed_size atomic Chi Zhiling
2026-10-03 3:30 ` Chi Zhiling [this message]
2026-10-03 3:30 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] exfat: advance valid_size while zeroing new ranges Chi Zhiling
2026-10-03 3:30 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] exfat: drop i_rwsem from exfat_page_mkwrite Chi Zhiling
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20261003033032.1775311-6-chizhiling@163.com \
--to=chizhiling@163.com \
--cc=Yuezhang.Mo@sony.com \
--cc=chenxiaosong@chenxiaosong.com \
--cc=chizhiling@kylinos.cn \
--cc=dxdt@dev.snart.me \
--cc=exfat@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=hyc.lee@gmail.com \
--cc=linkinjeon@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liubaolin12138@163.com \
--cc=sj1557.seo@samsung.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®