From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D54373C76AD for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2026 07:49:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790840980; cv=none; b=naNEIAnh8mkuRnWu3sYjMgBdTPIeNG81MNEjNbm1cu0vLsJievug4PqyX/B5V8TPdSEXyxffmMIYqiNbnyqCVDhv0962bdFeRC4/HLRueHcTemy73CTuvyMTwpCHUtsJIa3Uk26E2KmBMKfsANOKXeYwj44bioaH8PutaIP5nlk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790840980; c=relaxed/simple; bh=HV2nzX+bl+Bw8DzFMyNhj7oxqand2Z0RRt4/2EYV5DI=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=uNHutUAzjpUlIlRpPz/fOB5syDgzjI95rvCTK7yWK3rCfyNM4Se0rbhyGFmCMGo2M/awok2/dfKN51bLouB9h2epvXdOGPtGQXMSWBWqe6uqO/eBpa6T3SV2afnIhAB+g3l4FOu7Ac8p4w5WpDUf4daAzsl39VJBu9uJTppsk2c= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=FqyQhc7f; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="FqyQhc7f" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 514951F000FF; Thu, 1 Oct 2026 07:49:39 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1790840979; bh=HV2nzX+bl+Bw8DzFMyNhj7oxqand2Z0RRt4/2EYV5DI=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=FqyQhc7fjJBbI62b1U0CES4GPAbFb9+A01ksuVp10cU55HJfiKQC84SyoOJBlg3to yAV2PDxx/E4iym/o5BQIFvK7Np8uwOzidOVc+aZQrWQLqh5lIbfp094FKR7x/NMjzP KAnRhMqPVcPxAzqbGvOcM0Dws47XjtSvogX3JreS+h+vcoBd6e7CBj4NVA7qSm+Np7 UyS5FsKHolQSCU4uOhydjt7x2KxpkoPgR75qeCUnII95YeR10JadfAjBToht87dy+v FJw5RJ78bKzGIQbVCjc2+j4/SNsVratMJi3OqYXBRKrgi8ms4LwEj5aJL+WIiiIgos CLaaeTAyxZQuw== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] ext4: remove unused locked_ei parameter from __es_shrink() Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Qiliang Yuan" Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu In-Reply-To: <20261001-fix-ext4-es-scan-nr-scanned-v4-2-b13703714ce2@gmail.com> References: <20261001-fix-ext4-es-scan-nr-scanned-v4-0-b13703714ce2@gmail.com> <20261001-fix-ext4-es-scan-nr-scanned-v4-2-b13703714ce2@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2026 07:49:38 +0000 Message-Id: <20261001074939.514951F000FF@smtp.kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: > __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. >=20 > Drop the parameter along with the two code paths that exist solely to > support it: the ei =3D=3D 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. >=20 > Signed-off-by: Qiliang Yuan Sashiko has reviewed this patch and found no issues. It looks great! --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261001-fix-ext4-e= s-scan-nr-scanned-v4-0-b13703714ce2@gmail.com?part=3D2