diff mbox series

[08/10] xfs: check XFS_IDIRTY_RELEASE earlier in xfs_release_eofblocks

Message ID 20240623053532.857496-9-hch@lst.de (mailing list archive)
State Accepted, archived
Headers show
Series [01/10] xfs: fix freeing speculative preallocations for preallocated files | expand

Commit Message

Christoph Hellwig June 23, 2024, 5:34 a.m. UTC
If the XFS_IDIRTY_RELEASE flag is set, we are not going to free
the eofblocks, so don't bother locking the inode or performing the
checks in xfs_can_free_eofblocks.

Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
---
 fs/xfs/xfs_file.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Comments

Darrick J. Wong June 24, 2024, 3:50 p.m. UTC | #1
On Sun, Jun 23, 2024 at 07:34:53AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> If the XFS_IDIRTY_RELEASE flag is set, we are not going to free

         XFS_EOFBLOCKS_RELEASED ?

> the eofblocks, so don't bother locking the inode or performing the
> checks in xfs_can_free_eofblocks.

It'll still be the case that ->destroy_inode will have the chance to
delete the eofblocks if we don't do it here, correct?

If so, then
Reviewed-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>

--D

> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> ---
>  fs/xfs/xfs_file.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
> index de52aceabebc27..1903fa5568a37d 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
> @@ -1245,9 +1245,9 @@ xfs_file_release(
>  	 */
>  	if (inode->i_nlink &&
>  	    (file->f_mode & FMODE_WRITE) &&
> +	    !xfs_iflags_test(ip, XFS_EOFBLOCKS_RELEASED) &&
>  	    xfs_ilock_nowait(ip, XFS_IOLOCK_EXCL)) {
> -		if (xfs_can_free_eofblocks(ip) &&
> -		    !xfs_iflags_test(ip, XFS_EOFBLOCKS_RELEASED)) {
> +		if (xfs_can_free_eofblocks(ip)) {
>  			xfs_free_eofblocks(ip);
>  			xfs_iflags_set(ip, XFS_EOFBLOCKS_RELEASED);
>  		}
> -- 
> 2.43.0
> 
>
Christoph Hellwig June 24, 2024, 3:54 p.m. UTC | #2
On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 08:50:22AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 23, 2024 at 07:34:53AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > If the XFS_IDIRTY_RELEASE flag is set, we are not going to free
> 
>          XFS_EOFBLOCKS_RELEASED ?

Yes.

> > the eofblocks, so don't bother locking the inode or performing the
> > checks in xfs_can_free_eofblocks.
> 
> It'll still be the case that ->destroy_inode will have the chance to
> delete the eofblocks if we don't do it here, correct?

Yes.
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
index de52aceabebc27..1903fa5568a37d 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
@@ -1245,9 +1245,9 @@  xfs_file_release(
 	 */
 	if (inode->i_nlink &&
 	    (file->f_mode & FMODE_WRITE) &&
+	    !xfs_iflags_test(ip, XFS_EOFBLOCKS_RELEASED) &&
 	    xfs_ilock_nowait(ip, XFS_IOLOCK_EXCL)) {
-		if (xfs_can_free_eofblocks(ip) &&
-		    !xfs_iflags_test(ip, XFS_EOFBLOCKS_RELEASED)) {
+		if (xfs_can_free_eofblocks(ip)) {
 			xfs_free_eofblocks(ip);
 			xfs_iflags_set(ip, XFS_EOFBLOCKS_RELEASED);
 		}