[dm-devel] [PATCH 3/3] block: implement (some of) fallocate for block devices

[Bart Van Assche]

On 09/28/16 17:39, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> +	if (end > isize) {
> +		if (mode & FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE) {
> +			len = isize - start;
> +			end = start + len - 1;
> +		} else
> +			return -EINVAL;
> +	}

If FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE has been set and end == isize the above code 
won't reduce end to isize - 1. Shouldn't "end > isize" be changed into 
"end >= isize" ?

> +	switch (mode) {
> +	case FALLOC_FL_ZERO_RANGE:
> +	case FALLOC_FL_ZERO_RANGE | FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE:
> +		error = blkdev_issue_zeroout(bdev, start >> 9, len >> 9,
> +					    GFP_KERNEL, false);
> +		if (error)
> +			return error;
> +		break;
> +	case FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE | FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE:
> +		/* Only punch if the device can do zeroing discard. */
> +		if (!blk_queue_discard(q) || !q->limits.discard_zeroes_data)
> +			return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +		error = blkdev_issue_discard(bdev, start >> 9, len >> 9,
> +					     GFP_KERNEL, 0);
> +		if (error)
> +			return error;
> +		break;
> +	case FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE | FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE | FALLOC_FL_NO_HIDE_STALE:
> +		error = blkdev_issue_discard(bdev, start >> 9, len >> 9,
> +					     GFP_KERNEL, 0);
> +		if (error)
> +			return error;
> +		break;
> +	default:
> +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +	}

Have you considered to move "if (error) return error" out of the switch 
statement?

> +	/*
> +	 * Invalidate again; if someone wandered in and dirtied a page,
> +	 * the caller will be given -EBUSY;
> +	 */
> +	return invalidate_inode_pages2_range(mapping,
> +					     start >> PAGE_SHIFT,
> +					     end >> PAGE_SHIFT);

A comment might be appropriate here that since end is inclusive and 
since the third argument of invalidate_inode_pages2_range() is inclusive 
that rounding down will yield the correct result.

Bart.