Re: [PATCH v14 08/10] erofs: support unencoded inodes for page cache share

[Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@linux.alibaba.com>]

On 2026/1/15 09:36, Hongbo Li wrote:
> Hi,Xiang
> 
> On 2026/1/14 22:51, Gao Xiang wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2026/1/9 18:28, Hongbo Li wrote:
>>> This patch adds inode page cache sharing functionality for unencoded
>>> files.
>>>
>>> I conducted experiments in the container environment. Below is the
> 
> ...
>>>               iomap->inline_data = ptr;
>>> @@ -383,11 +385,16 @@ static int erofs_read_folio(struct file *file, struct folio *folio)
>>>           .ops        = &iomap_bio_read_ops,
>>>           .cur_folio    = folio,
>>>       };
>>> -    struct erofs_iomap_iter_ctx iter_ctx = {};
>>> +    bool need_iput;
>>> +    struct erofs_iomap_iter_ctx iter_ctx = {
>>> +        .realinode = erofs_real_inode(folio_inode(folio), &need_iput),
>>> +    };
>>> -    trace_erofs_read_folio(folio, true);
>>> +    trace_erofs_read_folio(iter_ctx.realinode, folio, true);
>>>       iomap_read_folio(&erofs_iomap_ops, &read_ctx, &iter_ctx);
>>> +    if (need_iput)
>>> +        iput(iter_ctx.realinode);
>>>       return 0;
>>>   }
>>> @@ -397,12 +404,17 @@ static void erofs_readahead(struct readahead_control *rac)
>>>           .ops        = &iomap_bio_read_ops,
>>>           .rac        = rac,
>>>       };
>>> -    struct erofs_iomap_iter_ctx iter_ctx = {};
>>> +    bool need_iput;
>>> +    struct erofs_iomap_iter_ctx iter_ctx = {
>>> +        .realinode = erofs_real_inode(rac->mapping->host, &need_iput),
>>> +    };
>>> -    trace_erofs_readahead(rac->mapping->host, readahead_index(rac),
>>> +    trace_erofs_readahead(iter_ctx.realinode, readahead_index(rac),
>>>                       readahead_count(rac), true);
>>
>> Is it possible to add a commit to update the tracepoints
>> to add the new realinode first?
> 
> Yeah, so should we put the update on trace_erofs_read_folio and trace_erofs_readahead in a single patch after "[PATCH v14 03/10] fs: Export alloc_empty_backing_file"?

I think the tracepoint one should be just before this patch.

> 
>   Since the first two patches in this series has merged in vfs tree (thanks Christian), should we reorder the left patches?

I think you just send the new patchset version
in the future without the first two patches
in the version.

Thanks,
Gao Xiang

> 
> Thanks,
> Hongbo
>