On Thu, Jan 07, 2021 at 02:05:57PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote:

The XFS developers might have a different opinion though, as they were the ones
who requested it originally:

	https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200312143445.GA19160@infradead.org (local)
	https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200325092057.GA25483@infradead.org (local)
	https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200325154759.GY29339@magnolia (local)
	https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200312223913.GL10776@dread.disaster.area (local)

Any thoughts from anyone about whether we should still introduce a separate
notification for lazytime expiration, vs. just using ->dirty_inode(I_DIRTY_SYNC)
with I_DIRTY_TIME in i_state?

I still find the way ->dirty_inode is used very confusing, but with this
series and Jan's first patch I think we have a good enough state for now
and don't need to add a method just for XFS.  I still think it might make
sense to eventually revisit how file systems are notified about dirtying.