From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out30-101.freemail.mail.aliyun.com (out30-101.freemail.mail.aliyun.com [115.124.30.101]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 473461CAA92; Mon, 8 Sep 2025 01:51:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=115.124.30.101 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757296311; cv=none; b=BqZsE1z87bCvIEmi2RkrxIyf/jq2TJC6qnSrqCPLjmMTT7v+yBy+TUTCeuqBxObtBXZFo+WEH3fAUKPlxv/RNI7VTQwgWp+zrEin/rcmUq4C4AkPiXOVeSNoFHefvrUI5u0wi1w9Y4/9jxD8JmgTr3U7P+QiHD+OyfgQ2XdzhYw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757296311; c=relaxed/simple; bh=oezj4ZW/OZn1ZzV3aAfA2dJ8To+R/lSex4B2dmnEGQ4=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=akhsD6yi7UwXjRUbh7kVXt4f557I1+WnEMXv6RSLGs/DYzemQnTS1QllMXEvvjtehXOPssj59hF4r1JgL0Sk63XxfessxH76QUaPsHXg3IB9tNxtXm05tqYjbr6PMkOqZdX+TI/qkoC+YtGUZrppg61NQw39F0EbDUMd8k/xRbQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.alibaba.com header.i=@linux.alibaba.com header.b=uZsZtv0Q; arc=none smtp.client-ip=115.124.30.101 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.alibaba.com header.i=@linux.alibaba.com header.b="uZsZtv0Q" DKIM-Signature:v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.alibaba.com; s=default; t=1757296300; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:From:Content-Type; bh=sYGhb8CfCA/s+oBe7rr2GPNIIdVTSG49ZvvqC96QQ0g=; b=uZsZtv0QouVwVruarLVy6TUH/vZwiYJExF5ul0FoNuZnrjasUFxF3iqGYszKAzLOxDzzJuAIEk2QDW88PJhYBWRP+DWZKwt2ZtKbtnCxG7FRh9os4FPIswnRP3sClaidEhss7+x1VhfIXegnvZwc6FfkRc2cLg0WtJwM9riLaSU= Received: from 30.221.128.217(mailfrom:joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0WnQBMaH_1757296298 cluster:ay36) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com; Mon, 08 Sep 2025 09:51:38 +0800 Message-ID: <8ddcaa59-0cf0-4b7c-a121-924105f7f5a6@linux.alibaba.com> Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2025 09:51:36 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [External] : [PATCH] ocfs2: retire ocfs2_drop_inode() and I_WILL_FREE usage To: Mateusz Guzik , Mark Tinguely Cc: ocfs2-devel@lists.linux.dev, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, jack@suse.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, josef@toxicpanda.com, jlbec@evilplan.org, mark@fasheh.com, brauner@kernel.org, willy@infradead.org, david@fromorbit.com References: <766vdz3ecpm7hv4sp5r3uu4ezggm532ng7fdklb2nrupz6minz@qcws3ufabnjp> <20250904154245.644875-1-mjguzik@gmail.com> From: Joseph Qi In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 2025/9/5 00:22, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > On Thu, Sep 4, 2025 at 6:15 PM Mark Tinguely wrote: >> >> On 9/4/25 10:42 AM, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >>> This postpones the writeout to ocfs2_evict_inode(), which I'm told is >>> fine (tm). >>> >>> The intent is to retire the I_WILL_FREE flag. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Mateusz Guzik >>> --- >>> >>> ACHTUNG: only compile-time tested. Need an ocfs2 person to ack it. >>> >>> btw grep shows comments referencing ocfs2_drop_inode() which are already >>> stale on the stock kernel, I opted to not touch them. >>> >>> This ties into an effort to remove the I_WILL_FREE flag, unblocking >>> other work. If accepted would be probably best taken through vfs >>> branches with said work, see https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/vfs/vfs.git/log/?h=vfs-6.18.inode.refcount.preliminaries__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!OLwk8DVo7uvC-Pd6XVTiUCgP6MUDMKBMEyuV27h_yPGXOjaq078-kMdC9ILFoYQh-4WX93yb0nMfBDFFY_0$ >>> >>> fs/ocfs2/inode.c | 23 ++--------------------- >>> fs/ocfs2/inode.h | 1 - >>> fs/ocfs2/ocfs2_trace.h | 2 -- >>> fs/ocfs2/super.c | 2 +- >>> 4 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/inode.c b/fs/ocfs2/inode.c >>> index 6c4f78f473fb..5f4a2cbc505d 100644 >>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/inode.c >>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/inode.c >>> @@ -1290,6 +1290,8 @@ static void ocfs2_clear_inode(struct inode *inode) >>> >>> void ocfs2_evict_inode(struct inode *inode) >>> { >>> + write_inode_now(inode, 1); >>> + >>> if (!inode->i_nlink || >>> (OCFS2_I(inode)->ip_flags & OCFS2_INODE_MAYBE_ORPHANED)) { >>> ocfs2_delete_inode(inode); >>> @@ -1299,27 +1301,6 @@ void ocfs2_evict_inode(struct inode *inode) >>> ocfs2_clear_inode(inode); >>> } >>> >>> -/* Called under inode_lock, with no more references on the >>> - * struct inode, so it's safe here to check the flags field >>> - * and to manipulate i_nlink without any other locks. */ >>> -int ocfs2_drop_inode(struct inode *inode) >>> -{ >>> - struct ocfs2_inode_info *oi = OCFS2_I(inode); >>> - >>> - trace_ocfs2_drop_inode((unsigned long long)oi->ip_blkno, >>> - inode->i_nlink, oi->ip_flags); >>> - >>> - assert_spin_locked(&inode->i_lock); >>> - inode->i_state |= I_WILL_FREE; >>> - spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock); >>> - write_inode_now(inode, 1); >>> - spin_lock(&inode->i_lock); >>> - WARN_ON(inode->i_state & I_NEW); >>> - inode->i_state &= ~I_WILL_FREE; >>> - >>> - return 1; >>> -} >>> - >>> /* >>> * This is called from our getattr. >>> */ >>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/inode.h b/fs/ocfs2/inode.h >>> index accf03d4765e..07bd838e7843 100644 >>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/inode.h >>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/inode.h >>> @@ -116,7 +116,6 @@ static inline struct ocfs2_caching_info *INODE_CACHE(struct inode *inode) >>> } >>> >>> void ocfs2_evict_inode(struct inode *inode); >>> -int ocfs2_drop_inode(struct inode *inode); >>> >>> /* Flags for ocfs2_iget() */ >>> #define OCFS2_FI_FLAG_SYSFILE 0x1 >>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/ocfs2_trace.h b/fs/ocfs2/ocfs2_trace.h >>> index 54ed1495de9a..4b32fb5658ad 100644 >>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/ocfs2_trace.h >>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/ocfs2_trace.h >>> @@ -1569,8 +1569,6 @@ DEFINE_OCFS2_ULL_ULL_UINT_EVENT(ocfs2_delete_inode); >>> >>> DEFINE_OCFS2_ULL_UINT_EVENT(ocfs2_clear_inode); >>> >>> -DEFINE_OCFS2_ULL_UINT_UINT_EVENT(ocfs2_drop_inode); >>> - >>> TRACE_EVENT(ocfs2_inode_revalidate, >>> TP_PROTO(void *inode, unsigned long long ino, >>> unsigned int flags), >>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/super.c b/fs/ocfs2/super.c >>> index 53daa4482406..e4b0d25f4869 100644 >>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/super.c >>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/super.c >>> @@ -129,7 +129,7 @@ static const struct super_operations ocfs2_sops = { >>> .statfs = ocfs2_statfs, >>> .alloc_inode = ocfs2_alloc_inode, >>> .free_inode = ocfs2_free_inode, >>> - .drop_inode = ocfs2_drop_inode, >>> + .drop_inode = generic_delete_inode, >>> .evict_inode = ocfs2_evict_inode, >>> .sync_fs = ocfs2_sync_fs, >>> .put_super = ocfs2_put_super, >> >> >> I agree, fileystems should not use I_FREEING/I_WILL_FREE. >> Doing the sync write_inode_now() should be fine in ocfs_evict_inode(). >> >> Question is ocfs_drop_inode. In commit 513e2dae9422: >> ocfs2: flush inode data to disk and free inode when i_count becomes zero >> the return of 1 drops immediate to fix a memory caching issue. >> Shouldn't .drop_inode() still return 1? > > generic_delete_inode is a stub doing just that. > In case of "drop = 0", it may return directly without calling evict(). This seems break the expectation of commit 513e2dae9422. Thanks, Joseph