From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailout1.samsung.com (mailout1.samsung.com [203.254.224.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 562EF38E8B4 for ; Thu, 8 Oct 2026 07:47:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=203.254.224.24 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791445641; cv=none; b=RjXIB0ntfVCSa6Hz5CPAJ9FOKlDAiV4PSXnE3+cFuZAjFUdM0ZUweDVYfWpZjnkuN1WQ8WVvdrHtl4oDPdJRB91RSdTB9AwyeAZeSLryBfUnsm6qFM5jvUBLQVyWOJkzVcz+M26KKT9lfrZ4NOlJJOoWstSb5K8l1C8AiCi/VKA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791445641; c=relaxed/simple; bh=WmDgLymXivLEP/4zC8uAdcdGK0ICXX4CozZw27Upafc=; h=Mime-Version:Subject:From:To:CC:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Date: Content-Type:References; b=al4Q3x8obNT1lRSqbuywgSD/TPVE8o0/OyRgDTyb+CZtd9vX44tH3gwQcxD+i1Jm49ifs0UMdBOselqSaZnXP0lPdV+xum4nHl0Dwf+pOfrwAdoxzWUSRjJtIh4Hloxd33PfwtyhTp61cxlyfMr35ENCBkXaxbIMRSK/SAqbH/Q= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=samsung.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=samsung.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=samsung.com header.i=@samsung.com header.b=PKY6VrT/; arc=none smtp.client-ip=203.254.224.24 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=samsung.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=samsung.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=samsung.com header.i=@samsung.com header.b="PKY6VrT/" Received: from epcas2p4.samsung.com (unknown [182.195.41.56]) by mailout1.samsung.com (KnoxPortal) with ESMTP id 20261008074716epoutp0193e39e679cb126e17bbedf080bd73ffd~cflCA0mQh0030100301epoutp01F for ; Thu, 8 Oct 2026 07:47:16 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mailout1.samsung.com 20261008074716epoutp0193e39e679cb126e17bbedf080bd73ffd~cflCA0mQh0030100301epoutp01F DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=samsung.com; s=mail20170921; t=1791445636; bh=WmDgLymXivLEP/4zC8uAdcdGK0ICXX4CozZw27Upafc=; h=Subject:Reply-To:From:To:CC:In-Reply-To:Date:References:From; b=PKY6VrT/MUoXRK6jh91qXN5bKGPkWL4lGPjrsvwHx/bJ9Ng9Kxpu2dIk2tuVdYHmf W2pSp4Cgl+kn5a5dbWsfH5in/622zTNM2ikiqUi7eP4qOqhnrEI8WIccljMpoL6QFp TjZeDWqZzeZ26hArRe9egnQ/ITgqcmX+jQcV0c00= Received: from epsnrtp01.localdomain (unknown [182.195.42.153]) by epcas2p3.samsung.com (KnoxPortal) with ESMTPS id 20261008074715epcas2p35351906e2bfbdb90b8a41e9d7328c806~cflBjax9Z1103111031epcas2p3_; Thu, 8 Oct 2026 07:47:15 +0000 (GMT) Received: from epcas2p2.samsung.com (unknown [182.195.38.211]) by epsnrtp01.localdomain (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4j0hsb0911z6B9mQ; Thu, 8 Oct 2026 07:47:15 +0000 (GMT) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE:(2) [PATCH 1/2] ext4: don't cache unzeroed blocks as written after a failed zeroout Reply-To: daejun7.park@samsung.com Sender: Daejun Park From: Daejun Park To: Ojaswin Mujoo CC: Theodore Ts'o , "linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org" , Jan Kara , Andreas Dilger , Baokun Li , "Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" , Zhang Yi , Zhang Yi , Harshad Shirwadkar , Li Chen , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "stable@vger.kernel.org" , Daejun Park X-Priority: 3 X-Content-Kind-Code: NORMAL In-Reply-To: X-CPGS-Detection: blocking_info_exchange X-Drm-Type: N,general X-Msg-Generator: Mail X-Msg-Type: PERSONAL X-Reply-Demand: N Message-ID: <20261008074714epcms2p27e156e29471fdc7a8f50cc8a422989a1@epcms2p2> Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2026 16:47:14 +0900 X-CMS-MailID: 20261008074714epcms2p27e156e29471fdc7a8f50cc8a422989a1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-Sendblock-Type: AUTO_CONFIDENTIAL CMS-TYPE: 102P X-CPGSPASS: Y X-CPGSPASS: Y cpgsPolicy: CPGSC10-223,Y X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-CMS-RootMailID: 20261008062023epcas2p17ab2f934eeb6ba157103b01c9cb59f5b References: <20261007-ext4-fc-zeroout-v1-0-b86de6439431@samsung.com> <20261007-ext4-fc-zeroout-v1-1-b86de6439431@samsung.com> Hi Ojaswin, On Thu, Oct 08, 2026 at 11:49:48 +0530, Ojaswin Mujoo wrote: > Feel free to add: > > Reviewed-by: Ojaswin Mujoo > > btw, did you catch this with some fstests? If not I think it would be > good to add a test for this. Thanks for the review. No, it wasn't fstests. I ran into it while working on 2/2: when adding the fast commit tracking next to ext4_zeroout_es(), I checked what it caches when the zeroout fails, and saw that zero_ex1/zero_ex2 keep their length on that path. To confirm it, I put dm-error under the file system and failed only the zeroout. I turned that into an fstests case [2]. The existing dm-error tests don't reach this path: they write with direct I/O, which leaves the extent unwritten until the I/O completes, and so does a buffered write with the default dioread_nolock. v2 [1] keeps this patch unchanged, so I'll carry your tag if there is a v3. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20261008-ext4-fc-zeroout-v2-0-55cab1e24fa3@samsung.com [2] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20261008-ext4-zeroout-eio-test-v1-1-9bb66deaf646@samsung.com Daejun