Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:413:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 19csp3466840pxp; Tue, 8 Mar 2022 15:12:54 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy+IE3wbGylmz5WPSF5ws7AOxonvkeVLTPmBcI+eRoh11MCj78Xu9/m4RGZJzSBb2H7Wv/p X-Received: by 2002:a63:fd4e:0:b0:378:7d6f:d7e9 with SMTP id m14-20020a63fd4e000000b003787d6fd7e9mr16123027pgj.440.1646781174180; Tue, 08 Mar 2022 15:12:54 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1646781174; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=kxMeYcZVUrd04mPktrSN9bHTxV8sJ7tzBfJsDZnAqY2czniJq31JraSbrhBZei96Gn 0AGWxLGFPQnWCDec8EjAapI79ol91v9DHVG28XIlE1xKWreKFsF1Sol5+dCDbiok66Kz uguGfXeEwDo1y87VC7emhFpVdtEdz40TLLs5VBTIyjU0uoSp5QgdJ9WAO1PyvGP5Bj6x l3P03yxkyYUd2GNZfuT+IfkMSNXhsYt3qPm9oxwidUghIdBMHkrd3K2cQQLCBTTPxdDj ujP587NhZttaRFDN3k7q5b3x1etJfPu8suuXy8+y1bnOYmxkbBEBc7jWNKMDUdhUWJ8U mECw== 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 :dkim-signature; bh=XKTzS4qY/ExYNSjF9XwFlmDawcC67b46dguzYhpP3o8=; b=W2iwFpyE+RaonOlYkFKSBu0gLUeOlUG/qmGSXv5q2Cg9tm0Zqcl9a3+DD6jZa3SCv3 HT/GrUNN3cUA+I3wNMcdUrn6aLxy72z6A/Cl7x+DCkvEGZA1EHuAKsoHQFAqEl3mP77E gdnU72qg9HkefC0h4y9FzIjuxE5B5y7UGHm5FWE0cNXQelTwx2sGZjHrfpSA73FNoJzc yb1qKhc4yFQlD3XLeIeKcSRltzTRdZsg1PZV+3Dz+RXBV4wySKMq18zZnGgpJXokS37N K6BxOkwj1IjqGBvncujEQAqiWNjvsSvSaDAGXbYikf1YpOYWlzLJt+WaK+EMb9gLI3Ai VWxw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@suse.cz header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=R2TtIVRy; dkim=neutral (no key) header.i=@suse.cz header.s=susede2_ed25519; spf=softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (lindbergh.monkeyblade.net. [23.128.96.19]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l9-20020a056a0016c900b004c5d194b2c6si192423pfc.282.2022.03.08.15.12.52 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 08 Mar 2022 15:12:54 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.19; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@suse.cz header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=R2TtIVRy; dkim=neutral (no key) header.i=@suse.cz header.s=susede2_ed25519; spf=softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 167F46C91B; Tue, 8 Mar 2022 15:08:58 -0800 (PST) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1346727AbiCHMbX (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 8 Mar 2022 07:31:23 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56560 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1345666AbiCHMbW (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Mar 2022 07:31:22 -0500 Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.220.29]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 412043FD98 for ; Tue, 8 Mar 2022 04:30:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay2.suse.de (relay2.suse.de [149.44.160.134]) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3F451F396; Tue, 8 Mar 2022 12:30:24 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1646742624; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=XKTzS4qY/ExYNSjF9XwFlmDawcC67b46dguzYhpP3o8=; b=R2TtIVRym1AeFR5oRsBaYitanz6bDxv9fXgvxusPNOhCYe6AcbMQGLtr18VwnlL8UeuKGu vn2KRXthrngQTly6gxDmgR3+4BBikS7WcvY8KxJJlMoX8Q1rtolRnS5FGF/kjdBfxwOjFb b5i7oNUqF9Fy8CtkBnf3ZYCjGB4vPtM= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1646742624; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=XKTzS4qY/ExYNSjF9XwFlmDawcC67b46dguzYhpP3o8=; b=dYjmApN05ePDdAX3gjUW2V3ELWg7HfY2oMBBc38IltrClYhz1hPWeImAr60I74nrd9CpHU AXP6nf7sq3TvEqDQ== Received: from quack3.suse.cz (unknown [10.100.224.230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by relay2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5692A3B83; Tue, 8 Mar 2022 12:30:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by quack3.suse.cz (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C70C1A0609; Tue, 8 Mar 2022 13:30:20 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2022 13:30:20 +0100 From: Jan Kara To: Harshad Shirwadkar Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, riteshh@linux.ibm.com, jack@suse.cz, tytso@mit.edu Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] ext4: for committing inode, make ext4_fc_track_inode wait Message-ID: <20220308123020.u4357jwbtoqhy5xd@quack3.lan> References: <20220308105112.404498-1-harshads@google.com> <20220308105112.404498-4-harshads@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220308105112.404498-4-harshads@google.com> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RDNS_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org On Tue 08-03-22 02:51:10, Harshad Shirwadkar wrote: > From: Harshad Shirwadkar > > If the inode that's being requested to track using ext4_fc_track_inode > is being committed, then wait until the inode finishes the commit. > > Signed-off-by: Harshad Shirwadkar Looks mostly good. Just some notes below. > diff --git a/fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.c b/fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.c > index 3477a16d08ae..7fa301b0a35a 100644 > --- a/fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.c > +++ b/fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.c > @@ -106,6 +106,18 @@ handle_t *__ext4_journal_start_sb(struct super_block *sb, unsigned int line, > GFP_NOFS, type, line); > } > > +handle_t *__ext4_journal_start(struct inode *inode, unsigned int line, > + int type, int blocks, int rsv_blocks, > + int revoke_creds) > +{ > + handle_t *handle = __ext4_journal_start_sb(inode->i_sb, line, > + type, blocks, rsv_blocks, > + revoke_creds); > + if (ext4_handle_valid(handle) && !IS_ERR(handle)) > + ext4_fc_track_inode(handle, inode); Why do you need to call ext4_fc_track_inode() here? Calls in ext4_map_blocks() and ext4_mark_iloc_dirty() should be enough, shouldn't they? > + return handle; > +} > + > int __ext4_journal_stop(const char *where, unsigned int line, handle_t *handle) > { > struct super_block *sb; ... > @@ -519,6 +525,33 @@ void ext4_fc_track_inode(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode) > return; > } > > + if (!test_opt2(inode->i_sb, JOURNAL_FAST_COMMIT) || > + (EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb)->s_mount_state & EXT4_FC_REPLAY)) > + return; > + > + spin_lock(&ei->i_fc_lock); > + while (ext4_test_inode_state(inode, EXT4_STATE_FC_COMMITTING)) { > +#if (BITS_PER_LONG < 64) > + DEFINE_WAIT_BIT(wait, &ei->i_state_flags, > + EXT4_STATE_FC_COMMITTING); > + wq = bit_waitqueue(&ei->i_state_flags, > + EXT4_STATE_FC_COMMITTING); > +#else > + DEFINE_WAIT_BIT(wait, &ei->i_flags, > + EXT4_STATE_FC_COMMITTING); > + wq = bit_waitqueue(&ei->i_flags, > + EXT4_STATE_FC_COMMITTING); > +#endif > + > + prepare_to_wait(wq, &wait.wq_entry, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE); > + spin_unlock(&ei->i_fc_lock); > + > + schedule(); > + finish_wait(wq, &wait.wq_entry); > + spin_lock(&ei->i_fc_lock); > + } > + spin_unlock(&ei->i_fc_lock); Hum, we operate inode state with atomic bitops. So I think there's no real need for ei->i_fc_lock here. You just need to be careful and check inode state again after prepare_to_wait() call. Honza -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR