From: Joanne Koong <joannelkoong@gmail.com>
To: Luis Henriques <luis@igalia.com>, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Matt Harvey <mharvey@jumptrading.com>,
Bernd Schubert <bschubert@ddn.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3] fuse: add new function to invalidate cache for all inodes
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 11:33:07 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2b65778e-7d26-4168-9346-6c1e01de350b@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250210143351.31119-1-luis@igalia.com>
On 2/10/25 6:33 AM, Luis Henriques wrote:
> Currently userspace is able to notify the kernel to invalidate the cache
> for an inode. This means that, if all the inodes in a filesystem need to
> be invalidated, then userspace needs to iterate through all of them and do
> this kernel notification separately.
>
> This patch adds a new option that allows userspace to invalidate all the
> inodes with a single notification operation. In addition to invalidate all
> the inodes, it also shrinks the sb dcache.
>
> Signed-off-by: Luis Henriques <luis@igalia.com>
> ---
> * Changes since v2
> Use the new helper from fuse_reverse_inval_inode(), as suggested by Bernd.
>
> Also updated patch description as per checkpatch.pl suggestion.
>
> * Changes since v1
> As suggested by Bernd, this patch v2 simply adds an helper function that
> will make it easier to replace most of it's code by a call to function
> super_iter_inodes() when Dave Chinner's patch[1] eventually gets merged.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241002014017.3801899-3-david@fromorbit.com
>
> fs/fuse/inode.c | 67 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> include/uapi/linux/fuse.h | 3 ++
> 2 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/fuse/inode.c b/fs/fuse/inode.c
> index e9db2cb8c150..45b9fbb54d42 100644
> --- a/fs/fuse/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/fuse/inode.c
> @@ -547,25 +547,78 @@ struct inode *fuse_ilookup(struct fuse_conn *fc, u64 nodeid,
> return NULL;
> }
>
> +static void inval_single_inode(struct inode *inode, struct fuse_conn *fc)
> +{
> + struct fuse_inode *fi;
> +
> + fi = get_fuse_inode(inode);
> + spin_lock(&fi->lock);
> + fi->attr_version = atomic64_inc_return(&fc->attr_version);
> + spin_unlock(&fi->lock);
> + fuse_invalidate_attr(inode);
> + forget_all_cached_acls(inode);
> +}
> +
> +static int fuse_reverse_inval_all(struct fuse_conn *fc)
> +{
> + struct fuse_mount *fm;
> + struct super_block *sb;
> + struct inode *inode, *old_inode = NULL;
> +
> + inode = fuse_ilookup(fc, FUSE_ROOT_ID, NULL);
> + if (!inode)
> + return -ENOENT;
> +
> + fm = get_fuse_mount(inode);
I think if you pass in &fm as the 3rd arg to fuse_ilookup(), it'll pass
back the fuse mount and we won't need get_fuse_mount().
> + iput(inode);
> + if (!fm)
> + return -ENOENT;
> + sb = fm->sb;
> +
> + spin_lock(&sb->s_inode_list_lock);
> + list_for_each_entry(inode, &sb->s_inodes, i_sb_list) {
> + spin_lock(&inode->i_lock);
> + if ((inode->i_state & (I_FREEING|I_WILL_FREE|I_NEW)) ||
> + !atomic_read(&inode->i_count)) {
Will inode->i_count ever be 0? AFAIU, inode->i_count tracks the inode
refcount, so if this is 0, doesn't this mean it wouldn't be on the
sb->s_inodes list?
> + spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
> + continue;
> + }
> +
> + __iget(inode);
> + spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
> + spin_unlock(&sb->s_inode_list_lock);
Maybe worth adding a comment here since there can be inodes added after
the s_inode_list_lock is dropped and before it's acquired again that
when inodes get added to the head of sb->s_inodes, it's always for I_NEW
inodes.
> + iput(old_inode);
Maybe a dumb question but why is old_inode needed? Why can't iput()just
be called right after inval_single_inode()?
> +
> + inval_single_inode(inode, fc);
> +
> + old_inode = inode;
> + cond_resched();
Could you explain why a cond_resched() is needed here?
> + spin_lock(&sb->s_inode_list_lock);
> + }
> + spin_unlock(&sb->s_inode_list_lock);
> + iput(old_inode);
> +
> + shrink_dcache_sb(sb);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
Thanks,
Joanne
> int fuse_reverse_inval_inode(struct fuse_conn *fc, u64 nodeid,
> loff_t offset, loff_t len)
> {
> - struct fuse_inode *fi;
> struct inode *inode;
> pgoff_t pg_start;
> pgoff_t pg_end;
>
> + if (nodeid == FUSE_INVAL_ALL_INODES)
> + return fuse_reverse_inval_all(fc);
> +
> inode = fuse_ilookup(fc, nodeid, NULL);
> if (!inode)
> return -ENOENT;
>
> - fi = get_fuse_inode(inode);
> - spin_lock(&fi->lock);
> - fi->attr_version = atomic64_inc_return(&fc->attr_version);
> - spin_unlock(&fi->lock);
> + inval_single_inode(inode, fc);
>
> - fuse_invalidate_attr(inode);
> - forget_all_cached_acls(inode);
> if (offset >= 0) {
> pg_start = offset >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> if (len <= 0)
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/fuse.h b/include/uapi/linux/fuse.h
> index 5e0eb41d967e..e5852b63f99f 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/fuse.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/fuse.h
> @@ -669,6 +669,9 @@ enum fuse_notify_code {
> FUSE_NOTIFY_CODE_MAX,
> };
>
> +/* The nodeid to request to invalidate all inodes */
> +#define FUSE_INVAL_ALL_INODES 0
> +
> /* The read buffer is required to be at least 8k, but may be much larger */
> #define FUSE_MIN_READ_BUFFER 8192
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-10 19:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-10 14:33 Luis Henriques
2025-02-10 19:33 ` Joanne Koong [this message]
2025-02-10 20:06 ` Bernd Schubert
2025-02-10 21:39 ` Luis Henriques
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2b65778e-7d26-4168-9346-6c1e01de350b@gmail.com \
--to=joannelkoong@gmail.com \
--cc=bschubert@ddn.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luis@igalia.com \
--cc=mharvey@jumptrading.com \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®