Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] lazytime fix and cleanups
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
Date: 2021-01-11 20:45:41
Also in:
linux-ext4, linux-f2fs-devel, linux-fsdevel
On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 04:15:17PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
Hi! On Fri 08-01-21 23:58:51, Eric Biggers wrote:quoted
Hello, Patch 1 fixes a bug in how __writeback_single_inode() handles lazytime expirations. I originally reported this last year (https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200306004555.GB225345@gmail.com (local)) because it causes the FS_IOC_REMOVE_ENCRYPTION_KEY ioctl to not work properly, as the bug causes inodes to remain dirty after a sync. It also turns out that lazytime on XFS is partially broken because it doesn't actually write timestamps to disk after a sync() or after dirtytime_expire_interval. This is fixed by the same fix. This supersedes previously proposed fixes, including https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200307020043.60118-1-tytso@mit.edu (local) and https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200325122825.1086872-3-hch@lst.de (local) from last year (which had some issues and didn't fix the XFS bug), and v1 of this patchset which took a different approach (https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210105005452.92521-1-ebiggers@kernel.org (local)). Patches 2-12 then clean up various things related to lazytime and writeback, such as clarifying the semantics of ->dirty_inode() and the inode dirty flags, and improving comments. Most of these patches could be applied independently if needed. This patchset applies to v5.11-rc2.The series look good to me. How do you plan to merge it (after resolving Christoph's remarks)? I guess either Ted can take it through the ext4 tree or I can take it through my tree...
I think taking it through your tree would be best, unless Al or Ted wants to take it. I'll probably separate out "xfs: remove a stale comment from xfs_file_aio_write_checks()", since it isn't really related anymore and could go in through the XFS tree. - Eric