* [PATCH] fs: rotate inodes whose page cache could not be dropped
@ 2026-10-16 10:25 Nikolaos Karaolidis
2026-10-17 7:43 ` Zhihao Cheng
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Nikolaos Karaolidis @ 2026-10-16 10:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christian Brauner, Alexander Viro
Cc: Jan Kara, Zhihao Cheng, Mateusz Guzik, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm,
linux-kernel, Nikolaos Karaolidis, stable
When inode_lru_isolate() drops the page cache of an unused inode, it
has to unlock the list, so it returns LRU_RETRY and the walk restarts
at the head of the list, where the inode still is. If
invalidate_mapping_pages() could not empty the mapping, the restarted
walk strips the same inode again, and so on until nr_to_walk runs out.
Every walk of that list then ends on this inode, and nothing behind it
is reclaimed for as long as its cache stays.
Before commit 2a0629834cd8 ("vfs: Don't evict inode under the inode lru
traversing context") the walker pinned the inode with a reference, and
dropping it in iput_final() set I_REFERENCED, so the restarted walk
rotated the inode to the tail. Set I_REFERENCED again when the mapping
is still populated after the invalidation, in the same i_lock section
that clears I_LRU_ISOLATING. inode_unpin_lru_isolating() now expects
i_lock to be held, like inode_pin_lru_isolating().
On CONFIG_HIGHMEM kernels this can happen to any unused inode: a folio
is left behind if it is locked, under writeback, spliced into a pipe,
or still in another CPU's LRU-add batch after being read. Without
HIGHMEM it happens to DAX inodes whose only entry is at index 0, which
mapping_shrinkable() lets onto the LRU and invalidate_mapping_pages()
never removes.
Fixes: 2a0629834cd8 ("vfs: Don't evict inode under the inode lru traversing context")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Assisted-by: LLM
Signed-off-by: Nikolaos Karaolidis <nick@karaolidis.com>
---
Found while working on reclaim of inodes pinned by page cache in
ZONE_MOVABLE.
Tested in QEMU/KVM on master af32da41b032 (v7.3-rc6-232), with lockdep
and KASAN enabled. A small init program makes one unused inode whose
page can't be invalidated, lets it reach the head of the inode LRU,
opens 2000 other files, does one "echo 2 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches"
and counts the inodes left via umount; kprobes count the
invalidate_mapping_pages() calls:
without patch with patch
i386 HIGHMEM, file read 2000 of 2000 left, none left,
on another CPU 10300 strips, 1 inode 4 strips
i386 HIGHMEM, page same same
spliced into a pipe
x86_64, ext4 -o dax, same same
file mmap()ed
controls (no leftover, none left none left
shadow entry at index 0)
2a0629834cd8^ behaves like the patched kernel, 2a0629834cd8 like
master. On 5.15.y x86_64, where every unused inode with page cache is
on the LRU, the read-on-another-CPU case blocks the walk as well.
With "echo 64M > /sys/fs/cgroup/memory.reclaim" instead of
drop_caches, the i386 pipe case does 262450 strips and frees nothing
without the patch, 40 strips and frees everything with it. In the DAX
case that write takes ~400ms with the patch instead of ~4ms:
invalidate_mapping_pages() counts the DAX entry it leaves behind as
reclaimed, so unpatched, the 64M are "reclaimed" by re-stripping one
inode in a tight loop while nothing is freed.
The reproducer is a single C file; I can post it.
An LLM was used to check the analysis against the code, write the
reproducer and draft the changelog; I have reviewed all of it.
fs/inode.c | 9 +++++++--
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/inode.c b/fs/inode.c
index a9d37be390a1..1614a97ce953 100644
--- a/fs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/inode.c
@@ -593,12 +593,11 @@ static void inode_pin_lru_isolating(struct inode *inode)
static void inode_unpin_lru_isolating(struct inode *inode)
{
- spin_lock(&inode->i_lock);
+ lockdep_assert_held(&inode->i_lock);
WARN_ON(!(inode_state_read(inode) & I_LRU_ISOLATING));
inode_state_clear(inode, I_LRU_ISOLATING);
/* Called with inode->i_lock which ensures memory ordering. */
inode_wake_up_bit(inode, __I_LRU_ISOLATING);
- spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
}
static void inode_wait_for_lru_isolating(struct inode *inode)
@@ -981,7 +980,13 @@ static enum lru_status inode_lru_isolate(struct list_head *item,
else
__count_vm_events(PGINODESTEAL, reap);
mm_account_reclaimed_pages(reap);
+
+ spin_lock(&inode->i_lock);
+ /* The walk restarts here: don't retry leftovers right away */
+ if (!mapping_empty(&inode->i_data))
+ inode_state_set(inode, I_REFERENCED);
inode_unpin_lru_isolating(inode);
+ spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
return LRU_RETRY;
}
base-commit: af32da41b0327b9c6a37856ba82b6760d6c8d10e
--
2.55.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] fs: rotate inodes whose page cache could not be dropped
2026-10-16 10:25 [PATCH] fs: rotate inodes whose page cache could not be dropped Nikolaos Karaolidis
@ 2026-10-17 7:43 ` Zhihao Cheng
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Zhihao Cheng @ 2026-10-17 7:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nikolaos Karaolidis, Christian Brauner, Alexander Viro
Cc: Jan Kara, Mateusz Guzik, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, linux-kernel, stable
在 2026/10/16 18:25, Nikolaos Karaolidis 写道:
> When inode_lru_isolate() drops the page cache of an unused inode, it
> has to unlock the list, so it returns LRU_RETRY and the walk restarts
> at the head of the list, where the inode still is. If
> invalidate_mapping_pages() could not empty the mapping, the restarted
> walk strips the same inode again, and so on until nr_to_walk runs out.
> Every walk of that list then ends on this inode, and nothing behind it
> is reclaimed for as long as its cache stays.
[...]
> static void inode_wait_for_lru_isolating(struct inode *inode)
> @@ -981,7 +980,13 @@ static enum lru_status inode_lru_isolate(struct list_head *item,
> else
> __count_vm_events(PGINODESTEAL, reap);
> mm_account_reclaimed_pages(reap);
> +
> + spin_lock(&inode->i_lock);
> + /* The walk restarts here: don't retry leftovers right away */
> + if (!mapping_empty(&inode->i_data))
> + inode_state_set(inode, I_REFERENCED);
> inode_unpin_lru_isolating(inode);
> + spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
> return LRU_RETRY;
> }
Hi Nikolaos,
I find a possible BUG_ON if this patch applied, details shown as:
P1 P2
prune_icache_sb
lock(lru->lock)
inode_lru_isolate
if (!mapping_empty(&inode->i_data))
unlock(lru->lock)
spin_lock(&inode->i_lock)
inode_state_set(inode, I_REFERENCED)
inode_unpin_lru_isolating
spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock)
unlink
iget_locked // find_inode_fast gets the inode
iput
iput_final
drop = 1
evict
BUG_ON(inode_state_read_once(inode) !=
(I_FREEING | I_CLEAR)) // inode state with I_REFERENCED
Could that be possible?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-10-17 7:43 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-10-16 10:25 [PATCH] fs: rotate inodes whose page cache could not be dropped Nikolaos Karaolidis
2026-10-17 7:43 ` Zhihao Cheng
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®