From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Chandan Babu R <chandan.babu@oracle.com>,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] xfs: embedd struct xfbtree into the owning structure
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2024 08:17:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240104071735.GB30339@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240104071454.GY361584@frogsfrogsfrogs>
On Wed, Jan 03, 2024 at 11:14:54PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> IIRC setting up the shrinker in xfs_alloc_buftarg_common takes some
> shrinker lock somewhere, and lockdep complained about a potential
> deadlock between the locks that scrub takes if I don't create the xfile
> buftarg in the scrub _setup routines. That's why it's not created
> internally to the xfbtree.
>
> I agree that it makes much more sense only to create those things when
> they're actually needed, but ... hm. Maybe we don't need the xfile
> buftarg to be hooked up to the shrinkers, seeing as it's ephemeral
> anyway? That would save a lot of fuss and ...
Yes, once we move to a model where the buffer always points to
the shmem page, and we remove the buffer lru for them as we already
have the page LRU there is no point in having a shrinker at all.
> > naming and moving it out of scrub/ would make sense as the concept
> > isn't really scrub/repair specific. But if we want to stick with
> > it I'd prefer to not also have _mem-based naming.
>
> Yes, lets move it to libxfs/xfbtree.[ch].
What does the xf in the various scrubx/xf* thinks stand for, btw?
Why not libxfs/xfs_btree_mem.[ch]?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-04 7:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-03 20:38 RFC: in-memory btree simplifications Christoph Hellwig
2024-01-03 20:38 ` [PATCH 1/5] xfs: remove the in-memory btree header block Christoph Hellwig
2024-01-04 1:24 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-01-04 6:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-01-04 17:25 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-01-03 20:38 ` [PATCH 2/5] xfs: remove struct xfboff_bitmap Christoph Hellwig
2024-01-03 20:38 ` [PATCH 3/5] xfs: remove bc_ino.flags Christoph Hellwig
2024-01-04 1:10 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-01-03 20:38 ` [PATCH 4/5] xfs: factor out a xfs_btree_owner helper Christoph Hellwig
2024-01-04 1:14 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-01-04 6:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-01-03 20:38 ` [PATCH 5/5] xfs: embedd struct xfbtree into the owning structure Christoph Hellwig
2024-01-04 1:21 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-01-04 6:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-01-04 7:14 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-01-04 7:17 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2024-01-04 7:22 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-01-04 19:28 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-01-05 4:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=20240104071735.GB30339@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=chandan.babu@oracle.com \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).