From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.133]:37434 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727057AbfBDUxM (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Feb 2019 15:53:12 -0500 Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 12:53:10 -0800 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10] xfs: track unlinked inode counts in per-ag data Message-ID: <20190204205310.GB30334@infradead.org> References: <154930313674.31814.17994684613232167921.stgit@magnolia> <154930315478.31814.9792968910867944759.stgit@magnolia> <20190204192451.GB47560@bfoster> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190204192451.GB47560@bfoster> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: Brian Foster Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 02:24:51PM -0500, Brian Foster wrote: > I'm a little confused where we're at with this one given the discussion > on the previous version. We've dropped the locking, but left the > tracking in place. Are we just relying on holding the agi in the > iunlink/iunlink_remove cases? If so, that seems reasonable to me but the > commit log should probably have a sentence or two on the serialization > rules. The commit log could also use an update to describe how this > value is actually used in this patch (as an unmount time check) as > opposed to some apparent throttling functionality that isn't a part of > this series. I thought we Darrick was going to drop this tracking from the series, as it isn't very useful (at least yet), but maybe I misunderstood the previous thread.