On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 07:26:14AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> We don't bother with the ILOCK as this is best-effort and thus a racy
> access is ok. Add a data_race() annotation to make that clear to
> memory model verifiers.
>
> Reported-by: cen zhang <zzzccc427@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
Looks okay
Reviewed-by: Carlos Maiolino <cmaiolino@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/xfs/xfs_file.c | 6 +++++-
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
> index 84f08c976ac4..a4a2109cb281 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
> @@ -1549,7 +1549,11 @@ xfs_file_release(
> */
> if (xfs_iflags_test_and_clear(ip, XFS_ITRUNCATED)) {
> xfs_iflags_clear(ip, XFS_EOFBLOCKS_RELEASED);
> - if (ip->i_delayed_blks > 0)
> + /*
> + * Don't bother with the ILOCK as this is best-effort and thus
> + * a racy access is ok.
> + */
> + if (data_race(ip->i_delayed_blks) > 0)
> filemap_flush(inode->i_mapping);
> }
>
> --
> 2.47.2
>
>
