Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:206:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 6csp5346162pxj; Wed, 26 May 2021 08:29:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyuJeibICL/XCH4C23sz4fIA/ZUFUJTONRXL0/y7aJ+QxGxYYOXRilgQnUoQhNkhPlNqLyg X-Received: by 2002:a92:2a0a:: with SMTP id r10mr26986007ile.274.1622042940909; Wed, 26 May 2021 08:29:00 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1622042940; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=RIhHAc9wiTCbesifvOWzawKd3ggKPlbZpRENWy/Ny8I/zAtHmvRAjdRUzWiKMQomHp LNB4jxY7dj/zRRME4rMDads6p/rWycTZaJYKagLoFhXgcv1nUvdfsV7IK5scu0NozhQM PetFijoRjdoEfvUXZQ4jH+/ULHnlAESq1A7rnfN0lMrTTVFwdZGBEVnfZr4UVQCUkxbF foL+YYW6dZ5fAlO5w6tykg/p91gp6/XhLCF9D6hWgxW88vQ9aCirktSpAae5uIkQpvX7 3c+npOIxsihrEgypp1cpHcSLjgN6Deis9BbsTHrPXbOvlX+i52BiUu1scXY3Oq+tNDAc TTIQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=yaK31paB4eVrRy7IeaGP9TvUAcIoqhXW6gG5tL/CumQ=; b=Iu+vNeWSvzOWL+6Hvc18nZY1jBVcJjcIeugimIMW4SKO6GTIrdU6UXmwDU4a3ssnBC cF+M9IsHEdALxbX6lMyDS/RW8ZlJVxtj6v/8djjY7D5eDeLothO2NzQvcut6JEEux3qL PgyBNQGTMqwcSlObk2v+A5kxMh2t5UOS6JUj6bsWwadxfJfDiHIgG9g6+/9quMuirVA8 +2TbhHRTFCcSrGHqlAuPgqZmpwEtFZeGcv9xuBMz/7F/oRtEGrwHWp2risVEcvM1P/zL 34H18XhmqI84uLIyBJMvAePkfzsvp3GAvcGQoJCPH5za4bVdjrywAF+qVPyqYBsqEn7m 5wsg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=vQ7xuH3O; 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; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id t128si24875770iof.16.2021.05.26.08.28.45; Wed, 26 May 2021 08:29:00 -0700 (PDT) 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; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=vQ7xuH3O; 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; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235562AbhEZP1O (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 26 May 2021 11:27:14 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:56200 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235600AbhEZP05 (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 May 2021 11:26:57 -0400 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8A6FB61378; Wed, 26 May 2021 15:25:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1622042725; bh=/uzTTNLjF88gVIvVPehwcj9E7+SDKIBIEbe1++RMcCA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=vQ7xuH3OSvQiH8WTyODIiNgCaa8VPSIlyo23vb9HtCWw7llMRo4A/QjKfRC588iEs cvBicODScd+zWU0/qy9HoNnaXPqGqeM7FPRW1d7eD3je2K9aXlvIXMfyoweXztaME1 I14haJq08cG54aoOyPVUR07m+a8Dp3PTJnGilKvamk99idXs9eZcznD7NKdNQgHXzw MCmHriw/JX66+IvWWdkHQ8tSWchzi7nZ3ymLuHxR3qrqa5nDnh77qs3pFVtTGrDfYH PdRj3qcJPIWztj+xrh/HZE/cXxl9nVGPOJbQzuoNKF2vnF6COWpAHtFpeZnx4It663 X4utnX24c9Niw== Date: Wed, 26 May 2021 08:25:25 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: Jan Kara Cc: Damien Le Moal , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "hch@infradead.org" , Dave Chinner , "ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org" , Chao Yu , "Darrick J. Wong" , Jaegeuk Kim , Jeff Layton , Johannes Thumshirn , "linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org" , Miklos Szeredi , Steve French , Ted Tso , Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/13] mm: Add functions to lock invalidate_lock for two mappings Message-ID: <20210526152525.GY202121@locust> References: <20210525125652.20457-1-jack@suse.cz> <20210525135100.11221-4-jack@suse.cz> <20210525204805.GM202121@locust> <20210526100702.GB30369@quack2.suse.cz> <20210526134518.GF30369@quack2.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210526134518.GF30369@quack2.suse.cz> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 03:45:18PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > On Wed 26-05-21 12:11:43, Damien Le Moal wrote: > > On 2021/05/26 19:07, Jan Kara wrote: > > > On Tue 25-05-21 13:48:05, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > >> On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 03:50:41PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > >>> Some operations such as reflinking blocks among files will need to lock > > >>> invalidate_lock for two mappings. Add helper functions to do that. > > >>> > > >>> Signed-off-by: Jan Kara > > >>> --- > > >>> include/linux/fs.h | 6 ++++++ > > >>> mm/filemap.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > >>> 2 files changed, 44 insertions(+) > > >>> > > >>> diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h > > >>> index 897238d9f1e0..e6f7447505f5 100644 > > >>> --- a/include/linux/fs.h > > >>> +++ b/include/linux/fs.h > > >>> @@ -822,6 +822,12 @@ static inline void inode_lock_shared_nested(struct inode *inode, unsigned subcla > > >>> void lock_two_nondirectories(struct inode *, struct inode*); > > >>> void unlock_two_nondirectories(struct inode *, struct inode*); > > >>> > > >>> +void filemap_invalidate_down_write_two(struct address_space *mapping1, > > >>> + struct address_space *mapping2); > > >>> +void filemap_invalidate_up_write_two(struct address_space *mapping1, > > >> > > >> TBH I find myself wishing that the invalidate_lock used the same > > >> lock/unlock style wrappers that we use for i_rwsem. > > >> > > >> filemap_invalidate_lock(inode1->mapping); > > >> filemap_invalidate_lock_two(inode1->i_mapping, inode2->i_mapping); > > > > > > OK, and filemap_invalidate_lock_shared() for down_read()? I guess that > > > works for me. > > > > What about filemap_invalidate_lock_read() and filemap_invalidate_lock_write() ? > > That reminds the down_read()/down_write() without the slightly confusing down/up. > > Well, if we go for lock wrappers as Darrick suggested, I'd mirror naming > used for inode_lock(). That is IMO the least confusing option... And that > naming has _lock and _lock_shared suffixes. I'd like filemap_invalidate_lock and filemap_invalidate_lock_shared. --D > > Honza > > -- > Jan Kara > SUSE Labs, CR