From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B013FC00306 for ; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 16:33:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A8D8207E0 for ; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 16:33:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2387541AbfIEQdL (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Sep 2019 12:33:11 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:50188 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2387514AbfIEQdK (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Sep 2019 12:33:10 -0400 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id E2E0468BE1; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 18:33:07 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 18:33:07 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Goldwyn Rodrigues Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, darrick.wong@oracle.com, hch@lst.de, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, Goldwyn Rodrigues Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/15] btrfs: update inode size during bio completion Message-ID: <20190905163307.GF22450@lst.de> References: <20190905150650.21089-1-rgoldwyn@suse.de> <20190905150650.21089-15-rgoldwyn@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190905150650.21089-15-rgoldwyn@suse.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 10:06:49AM -0500, Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote: > From: Goldwyn Rodrigues > > Update the inode size for dio writes during bio completion. > This ties the success of the underlying block layer > whether to increase the size of the inode. Especially for > in aio cases. Doesn't this belong into the patch adding the new direct I/O code? Or did the old code get this wrong and this is an additional bug fix?