On Sun, Jul 01, 2012 at 04:34:44AM -0600, Miao Xie wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 09:09:04 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > fs/btrfs/file.c | 13 ------------
> > fs/btrfs/inode.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > 2 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/file.c b/fs/btrfs/file.c
> > index 70dc8ca..9aa01ec 100644
> > --- a/fs/btrfs/file.c
> > +++ b/fs/btrfs/file.c
> > @@ -1334,7 +1334,6 @@ static ssize_t __btrfs_direct_write(struct kiocb *iocb,
> > loff_t *ppos, size_t count, size_t ocount)
> > {
> > struct file *file = iocb->ki_filp;
> > - struct inode *inode = fdentry(file)->d_inode;
> > struct iov_iter i;
> > ssize_t written;
> > ssize_t written_buffered;
> > @@ -1344,18 +1343,6 @@ static ssize_t __btrfs_direct_write(struct kiocb *iocb,
> > written = generic_file_direct_write(iocb, iov, &nr_segs, pos, ppos,
> > count, ocount);
> >
> > - /*
> > - * the generic O_DIRECT will update in-memory i_size after the
> > - * DIOs are done. But our endio handlers that update the on
> > - * disk i_size never update past the in memory i_size. So we
> > - * need one more update here to catch any additions to the
> > - * file
> > - */
> > - if (inode->i_size != BTRFS_I(inode)->disk_i_size) {
> > - btrfs_ordered_update_i_size(inode, inode->i_size, NULL);
> > - mark_inode_dirty(inode);
> > - }
> > -
> > if (written < 0 || written == count)
> > return written;
>
> We should fall back the i_size in btrfs_direct_IO if we fails to do direct IO, right?
>
No we would have only updated the i_size in the case that we created new
extents, we won't have i_size beyond where we have data. Thanks,
Josef
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
