Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/8 v2] ext4: initialize extent status tree
flat view
From: Zheng Liu <hidden>
Date: 2012-09-26 07:50:10
Also in:
linux-fsdevel
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 04:59:21PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 08:42:52PM +0800, Zheng Liu wrote:quoted
quoted
If so, we might want to think about adding a sanity check to make sure that by the time we are done with the inode in ext4_evict_inode() (after we have forced writeback), the ext4_es_tree is empty. Agreed?Today I revise this patch again, and I find extent_status_tree is freed in ext4_clear_inode(). So maybe I don't think that we need to check this tree to be freed in ext4_evict_inode(). This change is in this patch '[RFC][PATCH 4/8 v2] ext4: let ext4 maintain extent status tree'. What's your opinion?When you say "revise this patch again", does that mean that you would like to submit a new set of patch series with changes? Or just that you are looking at this patch set again? It's certainly true that ext4_evict_inode() will call ext4_clear_inode(), so it's not a question of worrying about a memory leak. I was thinking more about doing this as a cheap sanity check for the data structure. By the time we call ext4_evict_inode(), the mm layer all writeback should be complete. Hence, all of the entries to the tree _should_ have been removed by the time we call ext4_evict_inode(). I don't know if this is going to change as you start using this data structure for other purposes (such as locking a range of pages), but if I understand how things are currently working, it _should_ be the case that when ext4_evict_inode() calls ext4_clear_inode(), the call to ext4_es_remove_extent() should be a no-op, since all of the nodes in the extent status tree should have been released by then. If it isn't, then either I'm not understanding the code, or there's a bug in the code.
Hi Ted, When I try to add a BUG_ON in ext4_evict_inode() to ensure that extent status tree is empty, I will get an error, which reports that the tree is not empty. I find that there still has some dirty pages when we call ext4_evict_inode() because vfs doesn't write all dirty pages back. In iput_final(), we firstly call ext4_drop_inode(). If the return value is true, we won't call write_inode_now() to do a writeback. It means that we write some data to a file and remove it immediately, and then all dirty pages that aren't during writeback progress won't be written. These pages will be truncated in ext4_evict_inode(). Thus, the extent status tree is possible not to be empty when we call ext4_evict_inode(). So we cannot add a sanity check in this function. Am I missing something? Regards, Zheng