Thread (14 messages) 14 messages, 2 authors, 2021-06-01

Re: [PATCH 3/5] xfs: separate the dqrele_all inode grab logic from xfs_inode_walk_ag_grab

From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Date: 2021-06-01 00:20:28

On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 03:41:07PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>

Disentangle the dqrele_all inode grab code from the "generic" inode walk
grabbing code, and and use the opportunity to document why the dqrele
grab function does what it does.

Since dqrele_all is the only user of XFS_ICI_NO_TAG, rename it to
something more specific for what we're doing.

Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
---
 fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c |   64 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
 fs/xfs/xfs_icache.h |    4 ++-
 2 files changed, 62 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c
index 34b8b5fbd60d..5501318b5db0 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c
@@ -26,6 +26,8 @@
 
 #include <linux/iversion.h>
 
+static bool xfs_dqrele_inode_grab(struct xfs_inode *ip);
+
Just mov the function higher up in the file rather than add forward
declarations....
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
 /*
  * Allocate and initialise an xfs_inode.
  */
@@ -765,6 +767,22 @@ xfs_inode_walk_ag_grab(
 	return false;
 }
 
+static inline bool
+xfs_grabbed_for_walk(
+	int			tag,
+	struct xfs_inode	*ip,
+	int			iter_flags)
+{
+	switch (tag) {
+	case XFS_ICI_BLOCKGC_TAG:
+		return xfs_inode_walk_ag_grab(ip, iter_flags);
+	case XFS_ICI_DQRELE_NONTAG:
+		return xfs_dqrele_inode_grab(ip);
+	default:
+		return false;
+	}
+}
Not really a fan of this XFS_ICI_DQRELE_NONTAG rename. It kinda
smears caller context across the walk API. We really have two
different things here - we want a tagless lookup, and we want a
dquot specific grab function.

This API change just means we're going to have to rename the "no
tag" lookup yet again when we need some other non tag-based lookup.

And I think this is redundant, because....
+/* Decide if we want to grab this inode to drop its dquots. */
+static bool
+xfs_dqrele_inode_grab(
+	struct xfs_inode	*ip)
+{
+	bool			ret = false;
+
+	ASSERT(rcu_read_lock_held());
+
+	/* Check for stale RCU freed inode */
+	spin_lock(&ip->i_flags_lock);
+	if (!ip->i_ino)
+		goto out_unlock;
+
+	/*
+	 * Skip inodes that are anywhere in the reclaim machinery because we
+	 * drop dquots before tagging an inode for reclamation.
+	 */
+	if (ip->i_flags & (XFS_IRECLAIM | XFS_IRECLAIMABLE))
+		goto out_unlock;
+
+	/*
+	 * The inode looks alive; try to grab a VFS reference so that it won't
+	 * get destroyed.  If we got the reference, return true to say that
+	 * we grabbed the inode.
+	 *
+	 * If we can't get the reference, then we know the inode had its VFS
+	 * state torn down and hasn't yet entered the reclaim machinery.  Since
+	 * we also know that dquots are detached from an inode before it enters
+	 * reclaim, we can skip the inode.
+	 */
+	ret = igrab(VFS_I(ip)) != NULL;
+
+out_unlock:
+	spin_unlock(&ip->i_flags_lock);
+	return ret;
+}
This is basically just duplication of xfs_inode_walk_ag_grab()
without the XFS_INODE_WALK_INEW_WAIT check in it. At this point I
just don't see a reason for this function or the
XFS_ICI_DQRELE_NONTAG rename just to use this grab function...

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help