diff mbox series

[1/2] xfs: move the xfs_can_free_eofblocks call under the IOLOCK

Message ID 161610681213.1887542.5172499515393116902.stgit@magnolia (mailing list archive)
State Superseded
Headers show
Series xfs: make xfs_can_free_eofblocks a predicate | expand

Commit Message

Darrick J. Wong March 18, 2021, 10:33 p.m. UTC 
From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>

In xfs_inode_free_eofblocks, move the xfs_can_free_eofblocks call
further down in the function to the point where we have taken the
IOLOCK.  This is preparation for the next patch, where we will need that
lock (or equivalent) so that we can check if there are any post-eof
blocks to clean out.

Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
---
 fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c |   12 ++++--------
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

Comments

Christoph Hellwig March 19, 2021, 5:53 a.m. UTC | #1 
On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 03:33:32PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
> 
> In xfs_inode_free_eofblocks, move the xfs_can_free_eofblocks call
> further down in the function to the point where we have taken the
> IOLOCK.  This is preparation for the next patch, where we will need that
> lock (or equivalent) so that we can check if there are any post-eof
> blocks to clean out.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
> ---
>  fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c |   12 ++++--------
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> 
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c
> index e6a62f765422..7353c9fe05db 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c
> @@ -1294,13 +1294,6 @@ xfs_inode_free_eofblocks(
>  	if (!xfs_iflags_test(ip, XFS_IEOFBLOCKS))
>  		return 0;
>  
> -	if (!xfs_can_free_eofblocks(ip, false)) {
> -		/* inode could be preallocated or append-only */
> -		trace_xfs_inode_free_eofblocks_invalid(ip);
> -		xfs_inode_clear_eofblocks_tag(ip);
> -		return 0;
> -	}
> -
>  	/*
>  	 * If the mapping is dirty the operation can block and wait for some
>  	 * time. Unless we are waiting, skip it.
> @@ -1322,7 +1315,10 @@ xfs_inode_free_eofblocks(
>  	}
>  	*lockflags |= XFS_IOLOCK_EXCL;
>  
> -	return xfs_free_eofblocks(ip);
> +	if (xfs_can_free_eofblocks(ip, false))
> +		return xfs_free_eofblocks(ip);

Don't we still need to clear the radix tree tag here?

Also the fs_inode_free_eofblocks_inval tracepoint is unused now.
Darrick J. Wong March 19, 2021, 6:01 a.m. UTC | #2 
On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 05:53:40AM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 03:33:32PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
> > 
> > In xfs_inode_free_eofblocks, move the xfs_can_free_eofblocks call
> > further down in the function to the point where we have taken the
> > IOLOCK.  This is preparation for the next patch, where we will need that
> > lock (or equivalent) so that we can check if there are any post-eof
> > blocks to clean out.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >  fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c |   12 ++++--------
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> > 
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c
> > index e6a62f765422..7353c9fe05db 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c
> > @@ -1294,13 +1294,6 @@ xfs_inode_free_eofblocks(
> >  	if (!xfs_iflags_test(ip, XFS_IEOFBLOCKS))
> >  		return 0;
> >  
> > -	if (!xfs_can_free_eofblocks(ip, false)) {
> > -		/* inode could be preallocated or append-only */
> > -		trace_xfs_inode_free_eofblocks_invalid(ip);
> > -		xfs_inode_clear_eofblocks_tag(ip);
> > -		return 0;
> > -	}
> > -
> >  	/*
> >  	 * If the mapping is dirty the operation can block and wait for some
> >  	 * time. Unless we are waiting, skip it.
> > @@ -1322,7 +1315,10 @@ xfs_inode_free_eofblocks(
> >  	}
> >  	*lockflags |= XFS_IOLOCK_EXCL;
> >  
> > -	return xfs_free_eofblocks(ip);
> > +	if (xfs_can_free_eofblocks(ip, false))
> > +		return xfs_free_eofblocks(ip);
> 
> Don't we still need to clear the radix tree tag here?

I don't think so, because xfs_free_eofblocks will call
xfs_inode_clear_eofblocks_tag if it succeeds in freeing anything.

Though perhaps you're correct that we need to clear the tag if
!xfs_can_free_eofblocks, since we could have been called if
XFS_ICI_BLOCKGC_TAG was set in the radix tree because we once had a
posteof block but now we really only have cow blocks.

Yeah, ok, I'll add that back...

> Also the fs_inode_free_eofblocks_inval tracepoint is unused now.

...along with the tracepoint.

--D
Christoph Hellwig March 19, 2021, 6:31 a.m. UTC | #3 
On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 11:01:10PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> I don't think so, because xfs_free_eofblocks will call
> xfs_inode_clear_eofblocks_tag if it succeeds in freeing anything.
> 
> Though perhaps you're correct that we need to clear the tag if
> !xfs_can_free_eofblocks, since we could have been called if
> XFS_ICI_BLOCKGC_TAG was set in the radix tree because we once had a
> posteof block but now we really only have cow blocks.

Yes, that's what I meant.
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c
index e6a62f765422..7353c9fe05db 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c
@@ -1294,13 +1294,6 @@  xfs_inode_free_eofblocks(
 	if (!xfs_iflags_test(ip, XFS_IEOFBLOCKS))
 		return 0;
 
-	if (!xfs_can_free_eofblocks(ip, false)) {
-		/* inode could be preallocated or append-only */
-		trace_xfs_inode_free_eofblocks_invalid(ip);
-		xfs_inode_clear_eofblocks_tag(ip);
-		return 0;
-	}
-
 	/*
 	 * If the mapping is dirty the operation can block and wait for some
 	 * time. Unless we are waiting, skip it.
@@ -1322,7 +1315,10 @@  xfs_inode_free_eofblocks(
 	}
 	*lockflags |= XFS_IOLOCK_EXCL;
 
-	return xfs_free_eofblocks(ip);
+	if (xfs_can_free_eofblocks(ip, false))
+		return xfs_free_eofblocks(ip);
+
+	return 0;
 }
 
 /*