[PATCH] fat: issue flush after the writeback of FAT

[PATCH] fat: issue flush after the writeback of FAT

[Hou Tao]

fsync() needs to make sure the data & meta-data of file are persistent
after the return of fsync(), even when a power-failure occurs later.
In the case of fat-fs, the FAT belongs to the meta-data of file,
so we need to issue a flush after the writeback of FAT instead before.

Also bail out early when any stage of fsync fails.

Signed-off-by: Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>
---
 fs/fat/file.c | 11 ++++++++---
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/fat/file.c b/fs/fat/file.c
index b3bed32946b1..0e3ed79fcc3f 100644
--- a/fs/fat/file.c
+++ b/fs/fat/file.c
@@ -193,12 +193,17 @@ static int fat_file_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
 int fat_file_fsync(struct file *filp, loff_t start, loff_t end, int datasync)
 {
 	struct inode *inode = filp->f_mapping->host;
-	int res, err;
+	int err;
+
+	err = __generic_file_fsync(filp, start, end, datasync);
+	if (err)
+		return err;
 
-	res = generic_file_fsync(filp, start, end, datasync);
 	err = sync_mapping_buffers(MSDOS_SB(inode->i_sb)->fat_inode->i_mapping);
+	if (err)
+		return err;
 
-	return res ? res : err;
+	return blkdev_issue_flush(inode->i_sb->s_bdev, GFP_KERNEL, NULL);
 }
 
 
-- 
2.16.2.dirty

Re: [PATCH] fat: issue flush after the writeback of FAT

[Darrick J. Wong]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 11:01:58AM +0800, Hou Tao wrote:
> fsync() needs to make sure the data & meta-data of file are persistent
> after the return of fsync(), even when a power-failure occurs later.
> In the case of fat-fs, the FAT belongs to the meta-data of file,
> so we need to issue a flush after the writeback of FAT instead before.
> 
> Also bail out early when any stage of fsync fails.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>
> ---
>  fs/fat/file.c | 11 ++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/fat/file.c b/fs/fat/file.c
> index b3bed32946b1..0e3ed79fcc3f 100644
> --- a/fs/fat/file.c
> +++ b/fs/fat/file.c
> @@ -193,12 +193,17 @@ static int fat_file_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
>  int fat_file_fsync(struct file *filp, loff_t start, loff_t end, int datasync)
>  {
>  	struct inode *inode = filp->f_mapping->host;
> -	int res, err;
> +	int err;
> +
> +	err = __generic_file_fsync(filp, start, end, datasync);
> +	if (err)
> +		return err;
>  
> -	res = generic_file_fsync(filp, start, end, datasync);
>  	err = sync_mapping_buffers(MSDOS_SB(inode->i_sb)->fat_inode->i_mapping);

Huh.  I would've thought that flushing the FAT would also be required
at the end of a WB_SYNC_ALL (aka data integrity) writepages call?

The patch itself seems good, though.

--D

> +	if (err)
> +		return err;
>  
> -	return res ? res : err;
> +	return blkdev_issue_flush(inode->i_sb->s_bdev, GFP_KERNEL, NULL);
>  }
>  
>  
> -- 
> 2.16.2.dirty
> 

Re: [PATCH] fat: issue flush after the writeback of FAT

[OGAWA Hirofumi]

"Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com> writes:

>> +	err = __generic_file_fsync(filp, start, end, datasync);
>> +	if (err)
>> +		return err;
>>  
>> -	res = generic_file_fsync(filp, start, end, datasync);
>>  	err = sync_mapping_buffers(MSDOS_SB(inode->i_sb)->fat_inode->i_mapping);
>
> Huh.  I would've thought that flushing the FAT would also be required
> at the end of a WB_SYNC_ALL (aka data integrity) writepages call?

In fatfs implement, FAT area is flushed by sync_mapping_buffers(fat_inode). 
(FAT buffer is dirtied only by using bh->b_assoc_map to fat_inode)

Thanks.
-- 
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>

Re: [PATCH] fat: issue flush after the writeback of FAT

[OGAWA Hirofumi]

Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com> writes:

> fsync() needs to make sure the data & meta-data of file are persistent
> after the return of fsync(), even when a power-failure occurs later.
> In the case of fat-fs, the FAT belongs to the meta-data of file,
> so we need to issue a flush after the writeback of FAT instead before.
>
> Also bail out early when any stage of fsync fails.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>

Looks good.

Acked-by: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>

> ---
>  fs/fat/file.c | 11 ++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/fat/file.c b/fs/fat/file.c
> index b3bed32946b1..0e3ed79fcc3f 100644
> --- a/fs/fat/file.c
> +++ b/fs/fat/file.c
> @@ -193,12 +193,17 @@ static int fat_file_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
>  int fat_file_fsync(struct file *filp, loff_t start, loff_t end, int datasync)
>  {
>  	struct inode *inode = filp->f_mapping->host;
> -	int res, err;
> +	int err;
> +
> +	err = __generic_file_fsync(filp, start, end, datasync);
> +	if (err)
> +		return err;
>  
> -	res = generic_file_fsync(filp, start, end, datasync);
>  	err = sync_mapping_buffers(MSDOS_SB(inode->i_sb)->fat_inode->i_mapping);
> +	if (err)
> +		return err;
>  
> -	return res ? res : err;
> +	return blkdev_issue_flush(inode->i_sb->s_bdev, GFP_KERNEL, NULL);
>  }

-- 
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>