On 2025/9/9 17:49, Jan Kara wrote: > On Tue 09-09-25 09:23:56, Joseph Qi wrote: >> On 2025/9/8 21:54, Jan Kara wrote: >>> On Mon 08-09-25 20:41:21, Joseph Qi wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2025/9/8 18:23, Jan Kara wrote: >>>>> On Mon 08-09-25 09:51:36, Joseph Qi wrote: >>>>>> On 2025/9/5 00:22, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 4, 2025 at 6:15 PM Mark Tinguely <mark.tinguely@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 9/4/25 10:42 AM, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >>>>>>>>> This postpones the writeout to ocfs2_evict_inode(), which I'm told is >>>>>>>>> fine (tm). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The intent is to retire the I_WILL_FREE flag. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@xxxxxxxxx> >>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ACHTUNG: only compile-time tested. Need an ocfs2 person to ack it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> btw grep shows comments referencing ocfs2_drop_inode() which are already >>>>>>>>> stale on the stock kernel, I opted to not touch them. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This ties into an effort to remove the I_WILL_FREE flag, unblocking >>>>>>>>> other work. If accepted would be probably best taken through vfs >>>>>>>>> branches with said work, see https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/vfs/vfs.git/log/?h=vfs-6.18.inode.refcount.preliminaries__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!OLwk8DVo7uvC-Pd6XVTiUCgP6MUDMKBMEyuV27h_yPGXOjaq078-kMdC9ILFoYQh-4WX93yb0nMfBDFFY_0$ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> fs/ocfs2/inode.c | 23 ++--------------------- >>>>>>>>> fs/ocfs2/inode.h | 1 - >>>>>>>>> fs/ocfs2/ocfs2_trace.h | 2 -- >>>>>>>>> fs/ocfs2/super.c | 2 +- >>>>>>>>> 4 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/inode.c b/fs/ocfs2/inode.c >>>>>>>>> index 6c4f78f473fb..5f4a2cbc505d 100644 >>>>>>>>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/inode.c >>>>>>>>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/inode.c >>>>>>>>> @@ -1290,6 +1290,8 @@ static void ocfs2_clear_inode(struct inode *inode) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> void ocfs2_evict_inode(struct inode *inode) >>>>>>>>> { >>>>>>>>> + write_inode_now(inode, 1); >>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>> if (!inode->i_nlink || >>>>>>>>> (OCFS2_I(inode)->ip_flags & OCFS2_INODE_MAYBE_ORPHANED)) { >>>>>>>>> ocfs2_delete_inode(inode); >>>>>>>>> @@ -1299,27 +1301,6 @@ void ocfs2_evict_inode(struct inode *inode) >>>>>>>>> ocfs2_clear_inode(inode); >>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -/* Called under inode_lock, with no more references on the >>>>>>>>> - * struct inode, so it's safe here to check the flags field >>>>>>>>> - * and to manipulate i_nlink without any other locks. */ >>>>>>>>> -int ocfs2_drop_inode(struct inode *inode) >>>>>>>>> -{ >>>>>>>>> - struct ocfs2_inode_info *oi = OCFS2_I(inode); >>>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>>> - trace_ocfs2_drop_inode((unsigned long long)oi->ip_blkno, >>>>>>>>> - inode->i_nlink, oi->ip_flags); >>>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>>> - assert_spin_locked(&inode->i_lock); >>>>>>>>> - inode->i_state |= I_WILL_FREE; >>>>>>>>> - spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock); >>>>>>>>> - write_inode_now(inode, 1); >>>>>>>>> - spin_lock(&inode->i_lock); >>>>>>>>> - WARN_ON(inode->i_state & I_NEW); >>>>>>>>> - inode->i_state &= ~I_WILL_FREE; >>>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>>> - return 1; >>>>>>>>> -} >>>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>>> /* >>>>>>>>> * This is called from our getattr. >>>>>>>>> */ >>>>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/inode.h b/fs/ocfs2/inode.h >>>>>>>>> index accf03d4765e..07bd838e7843 100644 >>>>>>>>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/inode.h >>>>>>>>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/inode.h >>>>>>>>> @@ -116,7 +116,6 @@ static inline struct ocfs2_caching_info *INODE_CACHE(struct inode *inode) >>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> void ocfs2_evict_inode(struct inode *inode); >>>>>>>>> -int ocfs2_drop_inode(struct inode *inode); >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> /* Flags for ocfs2_iget() */ >>>>>>>>> #define OCFS2_FI_FLAG_SYSFILE 0x1 >>>>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/ocfs2_trace.h b/fs/ocfs2/ocfs2_trace.h >>>>>>>>> index 54ed1495de9a..4b32fb5658ad 100644 >>>>>>>>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/ocfs2_trace.h >>>>>>>>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/ocfs2_trace.h >>>>>>>>> @@ -1569,8 +1569,6 @@ DEFINE_OCFS2_ULL_ULL_UINT_EVENT(ocfs2_delete_inode); >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> DEFINE_OCFS2_ULL_UINT_EVENT(ocfs2_clear_inode); >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -DEFINE_OCFS2_ULL_UINT_UINT_EVENT(ocfs2_drop_inode); >>>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>>> TRACE_EVENT(ocfs2_inode_revalidate, >>>>>>>>> TP_PROTO(void *inode, unsigned long long ino, >>>>>>>>> unsigned int flags), >>>>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/super.c b/fs/ocfs2/super.c >>>>>>>>> index 53daa4482406..e4b0d25f4869 100644 >>>>>>>>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/super.c >>>>>>>>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/super.c >>>>>>>>> @@ -129,7 +129,7 @@ static const struct super_operations ocfs2_sops = { >>>>>>>>> .statfs = ocfs2_statfs, >>>>>>>>> .alloc_inode = ocfs2_alloc_inode, >>>>>>>>> .free_inode = ocfs2_free_inode, >>>>>>>>> - .drop_inode = ocfs2_drop_inode, >>>>>>>>> + .drop_inode = generic_delete_inode, >>>>>>>>> .evict_inode = ocfs2_evict_inode, >>>>>>>>> .sync_fs = ocfs2_sync_fs, >>>>>>>>> .put_super = ocfs2_put_super, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I agree, fileystems should not use I_FREEING/I_WILL_FREE. >>>>>>>> Doing the sync write_inode_now() should be fine in ocfs_evict_inode(). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Question is ocfs_drop_inode. In commit 513e2dae9422: >>>>>>>> ocfs2: flush inode data to disk and free inode when i_count becomes zero >>>>>>>> the return of 1 drops immediate to fix a memory caching issue. >>>>>>>> Shouldn't .drop_inode() still return 1? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> generic_delete_inode is a stub doing just that. >>>>>>> >>>>>> In case of "drop = 0", it may return directly without calling evict(). >>>>>> This seems break the expectation of commit 513e2dae9422. >>>>> >>>>> generic_delete_inode() always returns 1 so evict() will be called. >>>>> ocfs2_drop_inode() always returns 1 as well after 513e2dae9422. So I'm not >>>>> sure which case of "drop = 0" do you see... >>>>> >>>> I don't see a real case, just in theory. >>>> As I described before, if we make sure write_inode_now() will be called >>>> in iput_final(), it would be fine. >>> >>> I'm sorry but I still don't quite understand what you are proposing. If >>> ->drop() returns 1, the filesystem wants to remove the inode from cache >>> (perhaps because it was deleted). Hence iput_final() doesn't bother with >>> writing out such inodes. This doesn't work well with ocfs2 wanting to >>> always drop inodes hence ocfs2 needs to write the inode itself in >>> ocfs2_evice_inode(). Perhaps you have some modification to iput_final() in >>> mind but I'm not sure how that would work so can you perhaps suggest a >>> patch if you think iput_final() should work differently? Thanks! >>> >> I'm just discussing if generic_delete_inode() will always returns 1. And >> if it is, I'm fine with this change. Sorry for the confusion. > > generic_delete_inode() is defined as: > > int generic_delete_inode(struct inode *inode) > { > return 1; > } > > So the return is pretty much guaranteed :). But I agree with Mateusz the > function name could be less confusing. > Oops, I've mixed it with generic_drop_inode()... Thanks, Joseph
