From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 9D77A1113 for ; Tue, 5 Dec 2023 05:20:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="a8vvmA0T" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 25D7BC433C8; Tue, 5 Dec 2023 05:20:57 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1701753657; bh=ZmqGj2tXomAaXDyHe45kcMgyX/gAqBw0BlkgQkxq5Tg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=a8vvmA0Tp2E+qCW//HyJEWQnSmAecLpHsjUR1egoltP3jDZy9PqtA+pOwN+t+F/Il qIg3034CtJtaoXp2J8BYNHR1o8v2sJmBYlXb/fOdssZmlR6NnCA4ikpP0RSFq/xG7Q SLLhms24c+gErxp3M+248mq8JocO2aTut8nysjm0hW20UlCTvF2JSCX57A9FnVbBhj F5zvB5EBQBaL6JByUhGFGvyRMhY7HqHg5F4r/dg+gQ6aKFVeaiYlrwfc2fb43fwuQL xRTNq+QdrbPPryO3cNfXpKiicKN6xij6etOhpB2shDSN2zkuiDxLRXDaSkzdWH9lKf sRrzAVGl8VH7w== Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2023 21:20:56 -0800 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] xfs: repair quotas Message-ID: <20231205052056.GK361584@frogsfrogsfrogs> References: <170086928781.2771741.1842650188784688715.stgit@frogsfrogsfrogs> <170086928871.2771741.2277452744114090363.stgit@frogsfrogsfrogs> <20231130221015.GR361584@frogsfrogsfrogs> <20231204205214.GI361584@frogsfrogsfrogs> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon, Dec 04, 2023 at 08:27:50PM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Dec 04, 2023 at 12:52:14PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > > > > - xchk_ilock(sc, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL); > > > > > > if (error == -ECANCELED) > > > > > > error = 0; > > > > > > if (!xchk_fblock_process_error(sc, XFS_DATA_FORK, > > > > > > > > > > What is the replacement for this lock? The call in xrep_quota_item? > > > > > > > > The replacement is the conditional re-lock at the start of xrep_quota. > > > > > > Hmm. but not all scrub calls do even end up in the repair callbacks, > > > do they? Ok, I guess the xchk_iunlock call in xchk_teardown would have > > > just released it a bit later and we skip the cycle. Would have been > > > a lot easier to understand if this was in a well-explained > > > self-contained patch.. > > > > How about I not remove the xchk_ilock call, then? Repair is already > > smart enough to take the lock if it doesn't have it, so it's not > > strictly necessary for correct operation. > > No, please keep this hunk. As I said I would have preferred to have > it in a separate hunk to understand it, but it understand it now, and it > does seems useful. Ok, I'll keep it then. --D