* [PATCH v3 0/2] ext4: fix shrinker scan budget accounting, plus a related cleanup
@ 2026-09-30 7:11 Qiliang Yuan
2026-09-30 7:11 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] ext4: fix shrinker scan budget accounting in ext4_es_scan() Qiliang Yuan
2026-09-30 7:11 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] ext4: remove unused locked_ei parameter from __es_shrink() Qiliang Yuan
0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Qiliang Yuan @ 2026-09-30 7:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Theodore Ts'o, Andreas Dilger, Baokun Li, Jan Kara,
Ojaswin Mujoo, Ritesh Harjani (IBM), Zhang Yi
Cc: linux-ext4, linux-kernel, Qiliang Yuan, stable
This revises the ext4_es_scan() shrinker scan-budget fix per review,
and adds a small follow-up cleanup noticed during that review.
Patch 1 simplifies the fix to just returning SHRINK_STOP when
__es_shrink() frees nothing, dropping the sc->nr_scanned computation
entirely (Zhang Yi and Sashiko AI both pointed out it added risk
without a corresponding benefit: do_shrink_slab() discards
sc->nr_scanned on SHRINK_STOP anyway, and computing an accurate but
small nonzero value could reduce the SHRINK_STOP hit rate under light
background load).
Patch 2 removes __es_shrink()'s locked_ei parameter, which Zhang Yi
noted is dead: its sole caller always passes NULL.
Signed-off-by: Qiliang Yuan <odys.yuan@gmail.com>
---
V2 -> V3:
- Drop the sc->nr_scanned computation entirely; just return
SHRINK_STOP when __es_shrink() frees nothing (Zhang Yi, Sashiko AI
review).
- Add patch 2/2: remove the now-dead locked_ei parameter (Zhang Yi).
- Add a Fixes: tag for the commit that split count_objects()/
scan_objects() apart, and Cc: stable, matching the equivalent jbd2
fix.
- Re-measure test data against the simplified fix (429 -> 238 calls).
V1 -> V2:
- Correct the comment and commit message: nr_scanned == 0 is not
only reachable when sbi->s_es_list is genuinely empty, also when
every inode walked was skipped or had nothing currently
shrinkable. No code or test data changes.
v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260929-fix-ext4-es-scan-nr-scanned-v2-1-f4e8f6f6b8b1@gmail.com
v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260928-fix-ext4-es-scan-nr-scanned-v1-1-91d88228b0c8@gmail.com
---
Qiliang Yuan (2):
ext4: fix shrinker scan budget accounting in ext4_es_scan()
ext4: remove unused locked_ei parameter from __es_shrink()
fs/ext4/extents_status.c | 23 ++++++++++++++---------
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
---
base-commit: 502d801f0ab03e4f32f9a33d203154ce84887921
change-id: 20260928-fix-ext4-es-scan-nr-scanned-5af70744f6cd
Best regards,
--
Qiliang Yuan <odys.yuan@gmail.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v3 1/2] ext4: fix shrinker scan budget accounting in ext4_es_scan()
2026-09-30 7:11 [PATCH v3 0/2] ext4: fix shrinker scan budget accounting, plus a related cleanup Qiliang Yuan
@ 2026-09-30 7:11 ` Qiliang Yuan
2026-09-30 7:21 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-30 17:42 ` Jan Kara
2026-09-30 7:11 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] ext4: remove unused locked_ei parameter from __es_shrink() Qiliang Yuan
1 sibling, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Qiliang Yuan @ 2026-09-30 7:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Theodore Ts'o, Andreas Dilger, Baokun Li, Jan Kara,
Ojaswin Mujoo, Ritesh Harjani (IBM), Zhang Yi
Cc: linux-ext4, linux-kernel, Qiliang Yuan, stable
The extents_status shrinker's count_objects() callback,
ext4_es_count(), reports the number of shrinkable extent_status
objects via a percpu counter. do_shrink_slab() reads this count
exactly once per invocation and derives a one-shot scan budget
(total_scan) from it, then repeatedly calls scan_objects() in
fixed-size batches until that budget is exhausted.
ext4_es_scan() never signals SHRINK_STOP, so do_shrink_slab() has no
way to tell "there was nothing to reclaim this pass" from "a full
batch was scanned and none of it was freeable". It keeps calling
scan_objects() until the original, one-shot total_scan budget is
drained, even when sbi->s_es_list has had nothing left to give for a
while.
Return SHRINK_STOP whenever __es_shrink() frees nothing, so
do_shrink_slab() stops calling us for the rest of this reclaim pass
instead of burning through its scan budget against the same stale
freeable count.
Tested by fallocate(2)-ing 10000 4K files (to populate the shrinker
with reclaimable unwritten extents without also exercising the
extent_status "referenced" second-chance path, which needs a
separate two-pass accounting of its own) and triggering
"echo 2 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches", while tracing the
ext4_es_shrink* tracepoints:
total scan_objects() calls with
calls nr_shrunk == 0
before this patch 429 189 (44%)
after this patch 238 1 (0.4%)
Fixes: 1ab6c4997e04 ("fs: convert fs shrinkers to new scan/count API")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Qiliang Yuan <odys.yuan@gmail.com>
---
fs/ext4/extents_status.c | 10 ++++++++++
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents_status.c b/fs/ext4/extents_status.c
index 6e4a191e82191..d88af807d36e7 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/extents_status.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/extents_status.c
@@ -1783,6 +1783,16 @@ static unsigned long ext4_es_scan(struct shrinker *shrink,
ret = percpu_counter_read_positive(&sbi->s_es_stats.es_stats_shk_cnt);
trace_ext4_es_shrink_scan_exit(sbi->s_sb, nr_shrunk, ret);
+
+ /*
+ * es_stats_shk_cnt is a percpu counter, so it can stay positive
+ * after sbi->s_es_list has nothing left to give. Stop this reclaim
+ * pass once a call frees nothing, instead of burning through
+ * do_shrink_slab()'s scan budget against a stale count.
+ */
+ if (nr_shrunk == 0)
+ return SHRINK_STOP;
+
return nr_shrunk;
}
--
2.43.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v3 2/2] ext4: remove unused locked_ei parameter from __es_shrink()
2026-09-30 7:11 [PATCH v3 0/2] ext4: fix shrinker scan budget accounting, plus a related cleanup Qiliang Yuan
2026-09-30 7:11 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] ext4: fix shrinker scan budget accounting in ext4_es_scan() Qiliang Yuan
@ 2026-09-30 7:11 ` Qiliang Yuan
2026-09-30 7:17 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-30 17:34 ` Jan Kara
1 sibling, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Qiliang Yuan @ 2026-09-30 7:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Theodore Ts'o, Andreas Dilger, Baokun Li, Jan Kara,
Ojaswin Mujoo, Ritesh Harjani (IBM), Zhang Yi
Cc: linux-ext4, linux-kernel, Qiliang Yuan
__es_shrink()'s locked_ei parameter exists to let a caller pass in an
inode it already holds i_es_lock on, so the shrinker walk can skip
that inode instead of deadlocking on write_trylock(), and fall back
to reclaiming from it directly if nothing else could be freed. Its
only caller, ext4_es_scan(), always passes NULL.
Drop the parameter along with the two code paths that exist solely to
support it: the ei == locked_ei skip check, and the trailing
es_reclaim_extents(locked_ei, ...) fallback, neither of which can ever
run while locked_ei is always NULL.
Signed-off-by: Qiliang Yuan <odys.yuan@gmail.com>
---
fs/ext4/extents_status.c | 13 ++++---------
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents_status.c b/fs/ext4/extents_status.c
index d88af807d36e7..efbccb29d5fd1 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/extents_status.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/extents_status.c
@@ -183,8 +183,7 @@ static int __es_remove_extent(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblk,
int *reserved, struct extent_status *res,
struct extent_status *prealloc);
static int es_reclaim_extents(struct ext4_inode_info *ei, int *nr_to_scan);
-static int __es_shrink(struct ext4_sb_info *sbi, int nr_to_scan,
- struct ext4_inode_info *locked_ei);
+static int __es_shrink(struct ext4_sb_info *sbi, int nr_to_scan);
static int __revise_pending(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblk,
ext4_lblk_t len,
struct pending_reservation **prealloc);
@@ -1669,8 +1668,7 @@ void ext4_es_remove_extent(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblk,
ext4_da_release_space(inode, reserved);
}
-static int __es_shrink(struct ext4_sb_info *sbi, int nr_to_scan,
- struct ext4_inode_info *locked_ei)
+static int __es_shrink(struct ext4_sb_info *sbi, int nr_to_scan)
{
struct ext4_inode_info *ei;
struct ext4_es_stats *es_stats;
@@ -1706,7 +1704,7 @@ static int __es_shrink(struct ext4_sb_info *sbi, int nr_to_scan,
continue;
}
- if (ei == locked_ei || !write_trylock(&ei->i_es_lock)) {
+ if (!write_trylock(&ei->i_es_lock)) {
nr_skipped++;
continue;
}
@@ -1734,9 +1732,6 @@ static int __es_shrink(struct ext4_sb_info *sbi, int nr_to_scan,
goto retry;
}
- if (locked_ei && nr_shrunk == 0)
- nr_shrunk = es_reclaim_extents(locked_ei, &nr_to_scan);
-
out:
scan_time = ktime_to_ns(ktime_sub(ktime_get(), start_time));
if (likely(es_stats->es_stats_scan_time))
@@ -1779,7 +1774,7 @@ static unsigned long ext4_es_scan(struct shrinker *shrink,
ret = percpu_counter_read_positive(&sbi->s_es_stats.es_stats_shk_cnt);
trace_ext4_es_shrink_scan_enter(sbi->s_sb, nr_to_scan, ret);
- nr_shrunk = __es_shrink(sbi, nr_to_scan, NULL);
+ nr_shrunk = __es_shrink(sbi, nr_to_scan);
ret = percpu_counter_read_positive(&sbi->s_es_stats.es_stats_shk_cnt);
trace_ext4_es_shrink_scan_exit(sbi->s_sb, nr_shrunk, ret);
--
2.43.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] ext4: remove unused locked_ei parameter from __es_shrink()
2026-09-30 7:11 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] ext4: remove unused locked_ei parameter from __es_shrink() Qiliang Yuan
@ 2026-09-30 7:17 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-30 17:34 ` Jan Kara
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: sashiko-bot @ 2026-09-30 7:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Qiliang Yuan; +Cc: tytso, linux-ext4
> __es_shrink()'s locked_ei parameter exists to let a caller pass in an
> inode it already holds i_es_lock on, so the shrinker walk can skip
> that inode instead of deadlocking on write_trylock(), and fall back
> to reclaiming from it directly if nothing else could be freed. Its
> only caller, ext4_es_scan(), always passes NULL.
>
> Drop the parameter along with the two code paths that exist solely to
> support it: the ei == locked_ei skip check, and the trailing
> es_reclaim_extents(locked_ei, ...) fallback, neither of which can ever
> run while locked_ei is always NULL.
>
> Signed-off-by: Qiliang Yuan <odys.yuan@gmail.com>
Sashiko has reviewed this patch and found no issues. It looks great!
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260930-fix-ext4-es-scan-nr-scanned-v3-0-9aef0be87d21@gmail.com?part=2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] ext4: fix shrinker scan budget accounting in ext4_es_scan()
2026-09-30 7:11 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] ext4: fix shrinker scan budget accounting in ext4_es_scan() Qiliang Yuan
@ 2026-09-30 7:21 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-30 17:42 ` Jan Kara
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: sashiko-bot @ 2026-09-30 7:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Qiliang Yuan; +Cc: tytso, linux-ext4
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] ext4: premature SHRINK_STOP in ext4_es_scan() breaks LRU reclaim
--
commit 38269e532034036f670a12b2f9dedde4248280c0
Author: Qiliang Yuan <odys.yuan@gmail.com>
ext4: fix shrinker scan budget accounting in ext4_es_scan()
The extents_status shrinker's count_objects() callback reports the number of
shrinkable extent_status objects via a percpu counter. This patch returns
SHRINK_STOP when __es_shrink() frees nothing to prevent burning through the
scan budget against a stale freeable count.
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents_status.c b/fs/ext4/extents_status.c
> index 6e4a191e82191..d88af807d36e7 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/extents_status.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/extents_status.c
> @@ -1783,6 +1783,16 @@ static unsigned long ext4_es_scan(struct shrinker *shrink,
>
> ret = percpu_counter_read_positive(&sbi->s_es_stats.es_stats_shk_cnt);
> trace_ext4_es_shrink_scan_exit(sbi->s_sb, nr_shrunk, ret);
> +
> + /*
> + * es_stats_shk_cnt is a percpu counter, so it can stay positive
> + * after sbi->s_es_list has nothing left to give. Stop this reclaim
> + * pass once a call frees nothing, instead of burning through
> + * do_shrink_slab()'s scan budget against a stale count.
> + */
> + if (nr_shrunk == 0)
> + return SHRINK_STOP;
[Severity: High]
Does this prematurely abort the shrinker when scanning referenced items?
If __es_shrink() processes a full batch (e.g., 128 items) but all of them are
referenced, it clears their referenced bit (aging them) but frees none,
resulting in nr_shrunk == 0.
For example, in es_do_reclaim_extents():
(*nr_to_scan)--;
node = rb_next(&es->rb_node);
if (ext4_es_must_keep(es))
goto next;
if (ext4_es_is_referenced(es)) {
ext4_es_clear_referenced(es);
goto next;
}
Because scanning referenced or unfreeable extents correctly consumes the scan
budget without incrementing nr_shrunk, won't this conflate "scanned a batch of
hot items" with "the cache is empty", breaking the second-chance LRU algorithm
under memory pressure?
> return nr_shrunk;
> }
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260930-fix-ext4-es-scan-nr-scanned-v3-0-9aef0be87d21@gmail.com?part=1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] ext4: remove unused locked_ei parameter from __es_shrink()
2026-09-30 7:11 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] ext4: remove unused locked_ei parameter from __es_shrink() Qiliang Yuan
2026-09-30 7:17 ` sashiko-bot
@ 2026-09-30 17:34 ` Jan Kara
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Jan Kara @ 2026-09-30 17:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Qiliang Yuan
Cc: Theodore Ts'o, Andreas Dilger, Baokun Li, Jan Kara,
Ojaswin Mujoo, Ritesh Harjani (IBM), Zhang Yi, linux-ext4,
linux-kernel
On Wed 30-09-26 15:11:38, Qiliang Yuan wrote:
> __es_shrink()'s locked_ei parameter exists to let a caller pass in an
> inode it already holds i_es_lock on, so the shrinker walk can skip
> that inode instead of deadlocking on write_trylock(), and fall back
> to reclaiming from it directly if nothing else could be freed. Its
> only caller, ext4_es_scan(), always passes NULL.
>
> Drop the parameter along with the two code paths that exist solely to
> support it: the ei == locked_ei skip check, and the trailing
> es_reclaim_extents(locked_ei, ...) fallback, neither of which can ever
> run while locked_ei is always NULL.
>
> Signed-off-by: Qiliang Yuan <odys.yuan@gmail.com>
Looks good. Feel free to add:
Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Honza
> ---
> fs/ext4/extents_status.c | 13 ++++---------
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents_status.c b/fs/ext4/extents_status.c
> index d88af807d36e7..efbccb29d5fd1 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/extents_status.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/extents_status.c
> @@ -183,8 +183,7 @@ static int __es_remove_extent(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblk,
> int *reserved, struct extent_status *res,
> struct extent_status *prealloc);
> static int es_reclaim_extents(struct ext4_inode_info *ei, int *nr_to_scan);
> -static int __es_shrink(struct ext4_sb_info *sbi, int nr_to_scan,
> - struct ext4_inode_info *locked_ei);
> +static int __es_shrink(struct ext4_sb_info *sbi, int nr_to_scan);
> static int __revise_pending(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblk,
> ext4_lblk_t len,
> struct pending_reservation **prealloc);
> @@ -1669,8 +1668,7 @@ void ext4_es_remove_extent(struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t lblk,
> ext4_da_release_space(inode, reserved);
> }
>
> -static int __es_shrink(struct ext4_sb_info *sbi, int nr_to_scan,
> - struct ext4_inode_info *locked_ei)
> +static int __es_shrink(struct ext4_sb_info *sbi, int nr_to_scan)
> {
> struct ext4_inode_info *ei;
> struct ext4_es_stats *es_stats;
> @@ -1706,7 +1704,7 @@ static int __es_shrink(struct ext4_sb_info *sbi, int nr_to_scan,
> continue;
> }
>
> - if (ei == locked_ei || !write_trylock(&ei->i_es_lock)) {
> + if (!write_trylock(&ei->i_es_lock)) {
> nr_skipped++;
> continue;
> }
> @@ -1734,9 +1732,6 @@ static int __es_shrink(struct ext4_sb_info *sbi, int nr_to_scan,
> goto retry;
> }
>
> - if (locked_ei && nr_shrunk == 0)
> - nr_shrunk = es_reclaim_extents(locked_ei, &nr_to_scan);
> -
> out:
> scan_time = ktime_to_ns(ktime_sub(ktime_get(), start_time));
> if (likely(es_stats->es_stats_scan_time))
> @@ -1779,7 +1774,7 @@ static unsigned long ext4_es_scan(struct shrinker *shrink,
> ret = percpu_counter_read_positive(&sbi->s_es_stats.es_stats_shk_cnt);
> trace_ext4_es_shrink_scan_enter(sbi->s_sb, nr_to_scan, ret);
>
> - nr_shrunk = __es_shrink(sbi, nr_to_scan, NULL);
> + nr_shrunk = __es_shrink(sbi, nr_to_scan);
>
> ret = percpu_counter_read_positive(&sbi->s_es_stats.es_stats_shk_cnt);
> trace_ext4_es_shrink_scan_exit(sbi->s_sb, nr_shrunk, ret);
>
> --
> 2.43.0
>
--
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] ext4: fix shrinker scan budget accounting in ext4_es_scan()
2026-09-30 7:11 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] ext4: fix shrinker scan budget accounting in ext4_es_scan() Qiliang Yuan
2026-09-30 7:21 ` sashiko-bot
@ 2026-09-30 17:42 ` Jan Kara
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Jan Kara @ 2026-09-30 17:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Qiliang Yuan
Cc: Theodore Ts'o, Andreas Dilger, Baokun Li, Jan Kara,
Ojaswin Mujoo, Ritesh Harjani (IBM), Zhang Yi, linux-ext4,
linux-kernel, stable
On Wed 30-09-26 15:11:37, Qiliang Yuan wrote:
> The extents_status shrinker's count_objects() callback,
> ext4_es_count(), reports the number of shrinkable extent_status
> objects via a percpu counter. do_shrink_slab() reads this count
> exactly once per invocation and derives a one-shot scan budget
> (total_scan) from it, then repeatedly calls scan_objects() in
> fixed-size batches until that budget is exhausted.
>
> ext4_es_scan() never signals SHRINK_STOP, so do_shrink_slab() has no
> way to tell "there was nothing to reclaim this pass" from "a full
> batch was scanned and none of it was freeable". It keeps calling
> scan_objects() until the original, one-shot total_scan budget is
> drained, even when sbi->s_es_list has had nothing left to give for a
> while.
>
> Return SHRINK_STOP whenever __es_shrink() frees nothing, so
> do_shrink_slab() stops calling us for the rest of this reclaim pass
> instead of burning through its scan budget against the same stale
> freeable count.
>
> Tested by fallocate(2)-ing 10000 4K files (to populate the shrinker
> with reclaimable unwritten extents without also exercising the
> extent_status "referenced" second-chance path, which needs a
> separate two-pass accounting of its own) and triggering
> "echo 2 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches", while tracing the
> ext4_es_shrink* tracepoints:
>
> total scan_objects() calls with
> calls nr_shrunk == 0
> before this patch 429 189 (44%)
> after this patch 238 1 (0.4%)
>
> Fixes: 1ab6c4997e04 ("fs: convert fs shrinkers to new scan/count API")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Qiliang Yuan <odys.yuan@gmail.com>
...
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents_status.c b/fs/ext4/extents_status.c
> index 6e4a191e82191..d88af807d36e7 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/extents_status.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/extents_status.c
> @@ -1783,6 +1783,16 @@ static unsigned long ext4_es_scan(struct shrinker *shrink,
>
> ret = percpu_counter_read_positive(&sbi->s_es_stats.es_stats_shk_cnt);
> trace_ext4_es_shrink_scan_exit(sbi->s_sb, nr_shrunk, ret);
> +
> + /*
> + * es_stats_shk_cnt is a percpu counter, so it can stay positive
> + * after sbi->s_es_list has nothing left to give. Stop this reclaim
> + * pass once a call frees nothing, instead of burning through
> + * do_shrink_slab()'s scan budget against a stale count.
> + */
> + if (nr_shrunk == 0)
> + return SHRINK_STOP;
> +
I think this is wrong. It breaks proper aging of es entries. It can easily
happen that nr_shrunk is 0 because we've just cleared EXTENT_STATUS_REFERENCED
flag on each es we've met. I think your previous version was actually
better as much as I agree with Yi that there are some chances for increased
scanning as well.
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-09-30 17:42 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-09-30 7:11 [PATCH v3 0/2] ext4: fix shrinker scan budget accounting, plus a related cleanup Qiliang Yuan
2026-09-30 7:11 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] ext4: fix shrinker scan budget accounting in ext4_es_scan() Qiliang Yuan
2026-09-30 7:21 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-30 17:42 ` Jan Kara
2026-09-30 7:11 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] ext4: remove unused locked_ei parameter from __es_shrink() Qiliang Yuan
2026-09-30 7:17 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-30 17:34 ` Jan Kara
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox