From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from canpmsgout11.his.huawei.com (canpmsgout11.his.huawei.com [113.46.200.226]) (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 F204741C63; Thu, 15 Jan 2026 01:47:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=113.46.200.226 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1768441680; cv=none; b=E3xVKiyhrBwnTn+Hc5XfUnlEvz8QP19gjUsnD+OpLOrqeYg5LqiOn728oXJXDhF/p2uCeKmluNwqpMLFHc/4Dc7XvvVsY6LGuxdBr1ZIqDDXxGrzCZOSu6Ytds4oOBlDSk9xzZ7hlczAmq+iGcFfJE/aDaTCCiND5mNHfglKQvU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1768441680; c=relaxed/simple; bh=2V1nvjveLnLp/kZv5iMsAfgFoU/5mK6C0/O1KX+30Iw=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:CC:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=hUfM16FIsB/pcueIzKNpKrjnSFn8M24UEtWFcXjna4laazvQuKcggwUmsd1XX2VnhHxgjT1g89Sp0H06XRO3XxT6nvWVdDlHIMAL0xbJ5cMBdXvHO1uaQqyPc2MLSN2JLA2VUUaBRFkZd6V9erMAmQdrcRxhjKQD594xOjSX//4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=huawei.com header.i=@huawei.com header.b=N9k0wpAC; arc=none smtp.client-ip=113.46.200.226 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=huawei.com header.i=@huawei.com header.b="N9k0wpAC" dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=huawei.com; s=dkim; c=relaxed/relaxed; q=dns/txt; h=From; bh=C01OnGYG1L1pGK2zAThg6CrCN92Wwfy4Y4Qle2Tht9c=; b=N9k0wpACInb9szt+0RbGoN/5ovo8SZ0Jp/T/dxpw2H7DlTzctJ1ZP39Lj0NnmNlbIKu9EWRq5 bhncrOsxRMAydy2dx6wuNQljJTxd1UYRxN4cEgaCsz4Qb+7Du4y6j8M3SLTL+3aos5168/I87yo jHyS9Xk2B+YZ+TakkNBolj4= Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.162.92]) by canpmsgout11.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTPS id 4ds5Ps51gwzKmSg; Thu, 15 Jan 2026 09:44:33 +0800 (CST) Received: from kwepemr500015.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.202.195.162]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5E30540565; Thu, 15 Jan 2026 09:47:54 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.67.111.104] (10.67.111.104) by kwepemr500015.china.huawei.com (7.202.195.162) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Thu, 15 Jan 2026 09:47:53 +0800 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 09:47:53 +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: [PATCH v14 08/10] erofs: support unencoded inodes for page cache share To: Gao Xiang CC: , , , , , , Chao Yu , Christian Brauner References: <20260109102856.598531-1-lihongbo22@huawei.com> <20260109102856.598531-9-lihongbo22@huawei.com> <2d33cc2f-8188-4e62-b0be-bf985237bf24@linux.alibaba.com> <4152e93b-3f7d-4861-aad9-b7dc1ef71470@huawei.com> <2cec78b5-671a-447f-abbe-2b77c1f5d0da@linux.alibaba.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Hongbo Li In-Reply-To: <2cec78b5-671a-447f-abbe-2b77c1f5d0da@linux.alibaba.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-ClientProxiedBy: kwepems100002.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.206) To kwepemr500015.china.huawei.com (7.202.195.162) On 2026/1/15 9:46, Gao Xiang wrote: > > > 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. > Ok, Thanks, Hongbo > Thanks, > Gao Xiang > >> >> Thanks, >> Hongbo >>