From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-yw1-f181.google.com (mail-yw1-f181.google.com [209.85.128.181]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E45494BCACA for ; Wed, 9 Sep 2026 10:30:58 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.181 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788949860; cv=none; b=PQBJXfjaHCnCRJKbSFuOFIKD7Mbvw2sEs+Vp+m4l+h2UG4LF6i559nqgSfq/WSrcaiOlc7rGOtplHd9eVxN36d2vIRZBrldozvFuLWRDs+UpKPl4lTrR14cctH1aruZ4CfTNND9lD0XXVowFCIsfMBI6ONSJv7tgWUCpMoaUsVU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788949860; c=relaxed/simple; bh=e6+P0w42WSank7bJyBRxJ0I/o2AdvAByGwMedNmCY/Y=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=cKrKMWKGjFA4um/h7foZUaxWsgv14NHLJzsy5UWFQZXu7d2I9PH9qefhOUsoAMoZax8/KToFVd9D5Zktv4LOQX5ZTJ45iMxIAB/p2RlCdlad6RdfRGI56IyCbVWg3fXRoxsjRoomc3WtZDFIK3toA/1lhkK5Mpq+6xm3CZ+QbKY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=google.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b=dnL/0r+o; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.181 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=google.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="dnL/0r+o" Received: by mail-yw1-f181.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-86d43cdee51so70273487b3.2 for ; Wed, 09 Sep 2026 03:30:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20251104; t=1788949858; x=1789554658; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-type:mime-version:references:message-id:in-reply-to:subject :cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to :content-type; bh=xikkFdSddcZk7EZo4mTtVn7i5ie1aP6lqhxPtSw7MtA=; b=dnL/0r+om2LqYB9UWE6tkpdxIFAuAA70GZwyzBcqbjutXXb8HacxXnzq40Z7FLVc7D CsOGNNuLraa8Ye+UWFNxQLLysNo6ShwSpEpNaYyBF5h4KPkuwctUWSGDijbRS/GV6JQm QZFjVrOUF64ePn+xzLq1r98qqSC7BMmeYCW5UKBwB8Bus4PLL7vjqJzCOfHLkddxhtei o0gVwgxkyL0LbI12y+ZF0AwReh/ktCAWly79eYoR19C0eg33Qem0lJl9VSw41d+LlHjb /mGNIwm1h2TtZTnmayVZYgjeEaXPRTFhpgMtXetL38UDHNBAuregBL9hsCaIaL0XA+NM vbNA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1788949858; x=1789554658; h=content-type:mime-version:references:message-id:in-reply-to:subject :cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=xikkFdSddcZk7EZo4mTtVn7i5ie1aP6lqhxPtSw7MtA=; b=CKlGOImGfiMJiiYo4Qkfn7mOdsmoLARVObeDMIuDf1yXxzbUwC+xyWlzLKm0pUcBME 8w00CYmZ2mRnBhAfIGscz0nRvIREVHFim2izFK5AgnfgKpV0z5nkVTGWpSufgjMuihUh mPR7O1i0nVFu2bQWxRHjTegJnTQVihTIT75jUlFchEgEMKsFE600k1hyxImH/6H9Mk5Y GS5TxiheSw7qfV+34d8yeKVf0aDeKz06pTp4zFHCKvRUQE6hoTE/O142cpInD19x8xqy zXxFMc88ApW/Rg1rmsYr6+zwlr8GgxyrrKT2NuwM+JaNTsITOhMADum63aQMjfzkcgBA oE4A== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AKwUvBzv6kzoHHoLs2Jqu3c8dOM9F/hEcAqCpJu9UnLKO65sRMqzhoPx9JevRwih0oiW2KvIeFV3E2z9mYad2gA=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AFuF++mw29Gs1MOjHil8Y2m30IkVnQtNZ9x5eathYIZ7C1Ed1X2l/IlR 24uZRL4yq4WrAultbsMVCgq6CBhoLeYZW7sKUudbNqSd5HZrYhSo6KOBG8Sc/qnM/w== X-Gm-Gg: AYBFou2b4lW3FXa7clv0J/gnZYbZQRiu0zNbj8NIqaNeI3XT+Y8vsiCypQ0nWvU1jbc g5tD3cYvrbz0xh1fPZxGVRTrE2/zjDjI0yQm/ARMBXkCG0jXJxl3he6505nWaRimXfvlPtYbTMt KhIXZO+a0UYcAZXFKGzZZdeiAVdYQgpLmO8Sp6ENGc+c/BjIlKiZ+rgh8HQM0ZGNgs7H55qE0Lt o2tr4VvNroMHCnkImYNlA+rJF+py8PHb8WEUFdTRx/xSm7CJbCXl3FKio27/FPzRjHJxokFQ0g7 cwn2St1ecbejNfqNKoFMSP3GJET7h5OPWa8hpoM1Z0nmxhum0W3W7PVzQ37qctH3P9XS79Q62ai rzFlD3kOAtSAGMxWQwGldLXAmYlAI2XLkzgBmpeg0ED9oA0UfS9oNZ+qj5N1C7BKI3klWpe631w 5tI/TTY2+nH3b2XTPqGhT+HrXvexQwOXI8yv2v33GR5DSZA34mCXlpJYUcvzhyH2kVkHY3thLgw k5wxnUm5HjBn/GWORLEzyOF5MaokwCKzI5IKfKW71X0YKoesqspPw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:690c:c047:b0:845:1064:5c03 with SMTP id 00721157ae682-8712b59ce6dmr98838127b3.23.1788949857100; Wed, 09 Sep 2026 03:30:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.242] (172-10-233-147.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net. [172.10.233.147]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 00721157ae682-8714b52f641sm106441207b3.37.2026.09.09.03.30.53 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 09 Sep 2026 03:30:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2026 03:30:51 -0700 (PDT) From: Hugh Dickins To: Andrew Morton cc: Ackerley Tng , Alexander Viro , Alexandre Ghiti , Baolin Wang , Barry Song , Binbin Wu , Christian Brauner , Christoph Hellwig , Christoph Lameter , Claudio Imbrenda , David Hildenbrand , JP Kobryn , Jan Kara , Jens Axboe , Johannes Weiner , Kairui Song , Kiryl Shutsemau , Lance Yang , Leonardo Bras , Lorenzo Stoakes , Marcelo Tosatti , Matthew Wilcox , Mel Gorman , Miaohe Lin , Michal Hocko , Minchan Kim , Muchun Song , Oscar Salvador , Peter Zijlstra , Qi Zheng , Rik van Riel , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Shakeel Butt , Suren Baghdasaryan , Vlastimil Babka , Yang Shi , Yu Zhao , Zach O'Keefe , Zi Yan , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: [PATCH v2 23/26] fs,mm/fbatch: use invalidate_bh_lrus() not invalidate_bh_lrus_cpu() In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <56a1dba3-1dd4-e4dd-a38b-3fdee74a690e@google.com> References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Whilst there can be a case for including an invalidate_bh_lrus_cpu() in lru_add_drain_all()'s workqueued visits to remote CPUs, wouldn't it now be a preferable cleanup to remove that alternative, and stick with the smp_call_function_many_cond()-based invalidate_bh_lrus() throughout? And fix the UP lru_add_drain_all() to include an invalidate_bh_lrus(), which went missing when 5.15 commit 243418e3925d ("mm: fs: invalidate bh_lrus for only cold path") took that out of lru_add_drain(). Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins --- fs/buffer.c | 16 +--------------- include/linux/buffer_head.h | 4 ---- mm/folio.c | 25 ++++++------------------- 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/buffer.c b/fs/buffer.c index ed966fa73b1b..7d114e5b9c62 100644 --- a/fs/buffer.c +++ b/fs/buffer.c @@ -1427,7 +1427,7 @@ static void invalidate_bh_lru(void *arg) put_cpu_var(bh_lrus); } -bool has_bh_in_lru(int cpu, void *dummy) +static bool has_bh_in_lru(int cpu, void *dummy) { struct bh_lru *b = per_cpu_ptr(&bh_lrus, cpu); int i; @@ -1446,20 +1446,6 @@ void invalidate_bh_lrus(void) } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(invalidate_bh_lrus); -/* - * It's called from workqueue context so we need a bh_lru_lock to close - * the race with preemption/irq. - */ -void invalidate_bh_lrus_cpu(void) -{ - struct bh_lru *b; - - bh_lru_lock(); - b = this_cpu_ptr(&bh_lrus); - __invalidate_bh_lrus(b); - bh_lru_unlock(); -} - void folio_set_bh(struct buffer_head *bh, struct folio *folio, unsigned long offset) { diff --git a/include/linux/buffer_head.h b/include/linux/buffer_head.h index fd2c7115c054..f19f9e80be8f 100644 --- a/include/linux/buffer_head.h +++ b/include/linux/buffer_head.h @@ -518,8 +518,6 @@ bool mmb_has_buffers(struct mapping_metadata_bhs *mmb); void mmb_invalidate(struct mapping_metadata_bhs *mmb); int mmb_sync(struct mapping_metadata_bhs *mmb); void invalidate_bh_lrus(void); -void invalidate_bh_lrus_cpu(void); -bool has_bh_in_lru(int cpu, void *dummy); extern int buffer_heads_over_limit; #else /* CONFIG_BUFFER_HEAD */ @@ -528,8 +526,6 @@ static inline void buffer_init(void) {} static inline bool try_to_free_buffers(struct folio *folio) { return true; } static inline int mmb_sync(struct mapping_metadata_bhs *mmb) { return 0; } static inline void invalidate_bh_lrus(void) {} -static inline void invalidate_bh_lrus_cpu(void) {} -static inline bool has_bh_in_lru(int cpu, void *dummy) { return false; } #define buffer_heads_over_limit 0 #endif /* CONFIG_BUFFER_HEAD */ diff --git a/mm/folio.c b/mm/folio.c index d66aa2469e86..dbad66e805e2 100644 --- a/mm/folio.c +++ b/mm/folio.c @@ -681,21 +681,6 @@ void lru_add_drain(void) mlock_drain_local(); } -/* - * It's called from per-cpu workqueue context in SMP case so - * lru_add_drain_cpu and invalidate_bh_lrus_cpu should run on - * the same cpu. It shouldn't be a problem in !SMP case since - * the core is only one and the locks will disable preemption. - */ -static void lru_add_and_bh_lrus_drain(void) -{ - local_lock(&cpu_fbatches.lock); - lru_add_drain_cpu(smp_processor_id()); - local_unlock(&cpu_fbatches.lock); - invalidate_bh_lrus_cpu(); - mlock_drain_local(); -} - void lru_add_drain_cpu_zone(struct zone *zone) { local_lock(&cpu_fbatches.lock); @@ -711,7 +696,7 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct work_struct, lru_add_drain_work); static void lru_add_drain_per_cpu(struct work_struct *dummy) { - lru_add_and_bh_lrus_drain(); + lru_add_drain(); } static bool cpu_needs_drain(unsigned int cpu) @@ -724,8 +709,7 @@ static bool cpu_needs_drain(unsigned int cpu) folio_batch_count(&fbatches->lru_move_tail) || folio_batch_count(&fbatches->lru_deactivate_file) || folio_batch_count(&fbatches->lru_deactivate) || - need_mlock_drain(cpu)) || - has_bh_in_lru(cpu, NULL); + need_mlock_drain(cpu)); } /* @@ -824,6 +808,8 @@ static inline void __lru_add_drain_all(bool force_all_cpus) } } + invalidate_bh_lrus(); + for_each_cpu(cpu, &has_work) flush_work(&per_cpu(lru_add_drain_work, cpu)); @@ -839,6 +825,7 @@ void lru_add_drain_all(void) void lru_add_drain_all(void) { lru_add_drain(); + invalidate_bh_lrus(); } #endif /* CONFIG_SMP */ @@ -872,7 +859,7 @@ void lru_cache_disable(void) #ifdef CONFIG_SMP __lru_add_drain_all(true); #else - lru_add_and_bh_lrus_drain(); + lru_add_drain_all(); #endif } -- 2.51.0