Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:2785:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id ia5csp2326911pxb; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 07:00:56 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxjMpvxqmgonZUcweO4ZaEpqXmWzKa0+YAeKuXLwU9zXVhsHPHQ6R7RhckXe/8XLDIxAL9X X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:8cc:: with SMTP id d12mr14274608edz.0.1610377256314; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 07:00:56 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1610377256; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=W54LMjLLZoH4E77phojjFcVLQKdVqjaVUOwQXMd+hJE/O9WLSzEiCxVbDMOG7jeten hvSAkxaqWakq0YU78h6kjPZjLgZ2NUAp/sV15WGcKpioE3EwVPwg+IVgDEcYS/grlheW 5K18PEXnQq3gixoAz7KLYt92RryG5wG3WX9jbBQj/W5KVefbDtUhDlLjcxX63E4UUYhp acrHE4SJm8CrU/QIqF9Lht+RgyJ5W07xwnqEDXPxGr9ZFd7GWpzClCtjhjKONbY/p2Rk P31cosWufB610dQQ7o2+3vZ51bQCWLy2FdomMPazikOIlsZtYQuCdGdHbXAr6YfzXRXf mgmw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:user-agent:in-reply-to:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=jpf0oVhDqoXcgY4ra3WLZbLcSMugjBMzl8DWT6tUjLY=; b=vG2+y4qv55d2Bkcm0VSKDZuJys7yoX5UsqdFSwqMkp9JeGQ+a/IvpYR96vR+vUYiVX rNmF5fmz8HcpmxlUOeotexVrzfiQnWQQ2yk0qIQl8uYUIQI5CBY1vxrQzIx8AytaqMl0 9D07XzWjEa4NOVq72Sed9nU6hWWoBHktS56xjuBd0nOZK2UqLVAU2ErNR7rdXRbIbQWq g2MyfwlL1itP0SgMYqgZKOvxL8hwpIqIeOPCWTbEaCk9AMPWog0U976Vd0MZjGTJdRbS p+LNjtCUmjQkqhki8i25JjDKqlsrUtqC/T4wueMmcqxEQyzEEFErHCzH1uUx/h7mokir X9aQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id r23si17984edw.310.2021.01.11.07.00.32; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 07:00:56 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731088AbhAKPAL (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 11 Jan 2021 10:00:11 -0500 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:42178 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730214AbhAKPAL (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jan 2021 10:00:11 -0500 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85BC0AD1E; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 14:59:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: by quack2.suse.cz (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4933C1E0807; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 15:59:29 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2021 15:59:29 +0100 From: Jan Kara To: Eric Biggers Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Theodore Ts'o , Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/12] fs: clean up __mark_inode_dirty() a bit Message-ID: <20210111145929.GF18475@quack2.suse.cz> References: <20210109075903.208222-1-ebiggers@kernel.org> <20210109075903.208222-8-ebiggers@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210109075903.208222-8-ebiggers@kernel.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org On Fri 08-01-21 23:58:58, Eric Biggers wrote: > From: Eric Biggers > > Improve some comments, and don't bother checking for the I_DIRTY_TIME > flag in the case where we just cleared it. > > Also, warn if I_DIRTY_TIME and I_DIRTY_PAGES are passed to > __mark_inode_dirty() at the same time, as this case isn't handled. > > Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig > Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers Looks good. Feel free to add: Reviewed-by: Jan Kara Honza > --- > fs/fs-writeback.c | 49 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------ > 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c > index 2e6064012f7d3..80ee9816d9df5 100644 > --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c > +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c > @@ -2219,23 +2219,24 @@ static noinline void block_dump___mark_inode_dirty(struct inode *inode) > } > > /** > - * __mark_inode_dirty - internal function > + * __mark_inode_dirty - internal function to mark an inode dirty > * > * @inode: inode to mark > - * @flags: what kind of dirty (i.e. I_DIRTY_SYNC) > + * @flags: what kind of dirty, e.g. I_DIRTY_SYNC. This can be a combination of > + * multiple I_DIRTY_* flags, except that I_DIRTY_TIME can't be combined > + * with I_DIRTY_PAGES. > * > - * Mark an inode as dirty. Callers should use mark_inode_dirty or > - * mark_inode_dirty_sync. > + * Mark an inode as dirty. We notify the filesystem, then update the inode's > + * dirty flags. Then, if needed we add the inode to the appropriate dirty list. > * > - * Put the inode on the super block's dirty list. > + * Most callers should use mark_inode_dirty() or mark_inode_dirty_sync() > + * instead of calling this directly. > * > - * CAREFUL! We mark it dirty unconditionally, but move it onto the > - * dirty list only if it is hashed or if it refers to a blockdev. > - * If it was not hashed, it will never be added to the dirty list > - * even if it is later hashed, as it will have been marked dirty already. > + * CAREFUL! We only add the inode to the dirty list if it is hashed or if it > + * refers to a blockdev. Unhashed inodes will never be added to the dirty list > + * even if they are later hashed, as they will have been marked dirty already. > * > - * In short, make sure you hash any inodes _before_ you start marking > - * them dirty. > + * In short, ensure you hash any inodes _before_ you start marking them dirty. > * > * Note that for blockdevs, inode->dirtied_when represents the dirtying time of > * the block-special inode (/dev/hda1) itself. And the ->dirtied_when field of > @@ -2247,25 +2248,34 @@ static noinline void block_dump___mark_inode_dirty(struct inode *inode) > void __mark_inode_dirty(struct inode *inode, int flags) > { > struct super_block *sb = inode->i_sb; > - int dirtytime; > + int dirtytime = 0; > > trace_writeback_mark_inode_dirty(inode, flags); > > - /* > - * Don't do this for I_DIRTY_PAGES - that doesn't actually > - * dirty the inode itself > - */ > if (flags & I_DIRTY_INODE) { > + /* > + * Notify the filesystem about the inode being dirtied, so that > + * (if needed) it can update on-disk fields and journal the > + * inode. This is only needed when the inode itself is being > + * dirtied now. I.e. it's only needed for I_DIRTY_INODE, not > + * for just I_DIRTY_PAGES or I_DIRTY_TIME. > + */ > trace_writeback_dirty_inode_start(inode, flags); > - > if (sb->s_op->dirty_inode) > sb->s_op->dirty_inode(inode, flags & I_DIRTY_INODE); > - > trace_writeback_dirty_inode(inode, flags); > > + /* I_DIRTY_INODE supersedes I_DIRTY_TIME. */ > flags &= ~I_DIRTY_TIME; > + } else { > + /* > + * Else it's either I_DIRTY_PAGES, I_DIRTY_TIME, or nothing. > + * (We don't support setting both I_DIRTY_PAGES and I_DIRTY_TIME > + * in one call to __mark_inode_dirty().) > + */ > + dirtytime = flags & I_DIRTY_TIME; > + WARN_ON_ONCE(dirtytime && flags != I_DIRTY_TIME); > } > - dirtytime = flags & I_DIRTY_TIME; > > /* > * Paired with smp_mb() in __writeback_single_inode() for the > @@ -2288,6 +2298,7 @@ void __mark_inode_dirty(struct inode *inode, int flags) > > inode_attach_wb(inode, NULL); > > + /* I_DIRTY_INODE supersedes I_DIRTY_TIME. */ > if (flags & I_DIRTY_INODE) > inode->i_state &= ~I_DIRTY_TIME; > inode->i_state |= flags; > -- > 2.30.0 > -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR