From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Marc Lehmann <schmorp@schmorp.de>, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: drastic changes to allocsize semantics in or around 2.6.38?
Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 10:20:26 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110524002026.GC32466@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110523090144.GB15985@infradead.org>
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 05:01:44AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 11:20:34AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> >
> > The state used to track dirty inode release calls is not reset when
> > an inode is reallocated and reused from the reclaimable state. This
> > leads to specualtive preallocation not being truncated away in the
> > expected manner for local files until the inode is subsequently
> > truncated, freed or cycles out of the cache.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > fs/xfs/xfs_iget.c | 7 +++++++
> > 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_iget.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_iget.c
> > index cb9b6d1..e75e757 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_iget.c
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_iget.c
> > @@ -241,6 +241,13 @@ xfs_iget_cache_hit(
> > */
> > ip->i_flags |= XFS_IRECLAIM;
> >
> > + /*
> > + * clear the dirty release state as we are now effectively a
> > + * new inode and so we need to treat speculative preallocation
> > + * accordingly.
> > + */
> > + ip->i_flags &= ~XFS_IDIRTY_RELEASE;
>
> Btw, don't we need to clear even more flags here? To me it seems we
> need to clear XFS_ISTALE, XFS_IFILESTREAM and XFS_ITRUNCATED as well.
XFS_ISTALE is cleared unconditionally at the end of the function,
which means that any lookup on a stale inode will clear it. I'm not
absolutely sure this is right now that I think about it but that's a
different issue.
XFS_ITRUNCATED is mostly harmless, so it isn't a but issue, but we
probably should clear it. I'm not sure what the end result of not
clearing XFS_IFILESTREAM is, but you are right in that it should not
pass through here, either. I'll respin the patch to clear all the
state flags that hold sub-lifecycle state.
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-24 0:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-20 0:55 drastic changes to allocsize semantics in or around 2.6.38? Marc Lehmann
2011-05-20 2:56 ` Dave Chinner
2011-05-20 15:49 ` Marc Lehmann
2011-05-21 0:45 ` Dave Chinner
2011-05-21 1:36 ` Marc Lehmann
2011-05-21 3:15 ` Dave Chinner
2011-05-21 4:16 ` Marc Lehmann
2011-05-22 2:00 ` Dave Chinner
2011-05-22 7:59 ` Matthias Schniedermeyer
2011-05-23 1:20 ` Dave Chinner
2011-05-23 9:01 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-05-24 0:20 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2011-05-23 13:35 ` Marc Lehmann
2011-05-24 1:30 ` Dave Chinner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110524002026.GC32466@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=schmorp@schmorp.de \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox