public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Carlos Maiolino <cem@kernel.org>, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/15] xfs: move b_li_list based retry handling to common code
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2025 23:18:05 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250113071805.GB1306365@frogsfrogsfrogs> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250107070322.GA14713@lst.de>

On Tue, Jan 07, 2025 at 08:03:22AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 06, 2025 at 10:55:47PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 06, 2025 at 10:54:51AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > The dquot and inode version are very similar, which is expected given the
> > > overall b_li_list logic.  The differences are that the inode version also
> > > clears the XFS_LI_FLUSHING which is defined in common but only ever set
> > > by the inode item, and that the dquot version takes the ail_lock over
> > > the list iteration.  While this seems sensible given that additions and
> > > removals from b_li_list are protected by the ail_lock, log items are
> > > only added before buffer submission, and are only removed when completing
> > > the buffer, so nothing can change the list when retrying a buffer.
> > 
> > Heh, I think that's not quite true -- I think xfs_dquot_detach_buf
> > actually has a bug where it needs to take the buffer lock before
> > detaching the dquot from the b_li_list.  And I think kfence just whacked
> > me for that on tonight's fstests run.
> 
> Ooops :)

...and I think this is now in -rc7 so no worries here.

> > > +	list_for_each_entry(lip, &bp->b_li_list, li_bio_list) {
> > > +		set_bit(XFS_LI_FAILED, &lip->li_flags);
> > > +		clear_bit(XFS_LI_FLUSHING, &lip->li_flags);
> > 
> > Should dquot log items be setting XFS_LI_FLUSHING?
> 
> That would help to avoid roundtrips into ->iop_push and thus a
> dqlock (try)lock roundtrip for them.  So it would be nice to have,
> but it's not functionally needed.

<nod> Sounds like a reasonable cleanup for someone.

For this change,
Reviewed-by: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>

--D


  reply	other threads:[~2025-01-13  7:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-01-06  9:54 buffer cache cleanups Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-06  9:54 ` [PATCH 01/15] xfs: fix a double completion for buffers on in-memory targets Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-07  2:00   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-01-07  6:05     ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-06  9:54 ` [PATCH 02/15] xfs: remove the incorrect comment above xfs_buf_free_maps Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-07  2:00   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-01-06  9:54 ` [PATCH 03/15] xfs: remove the incorrect comment about the b_pag field Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-07  2:01   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-01-06  9:54 ` [PATCH 04/15] xfs: move xfs_buf_iowait out of (__)xfs_buf_submit Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-07  2:02   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-01-06  9:54 ` [PATCH 05/15] xfs: simplify xfs_buf_delwri_pushbuf Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-07  2:08   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-01-07  6:06     ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-13  7:12       ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-01-06  9:54 ` [PATCH 06/15] xfs: remove xfs_buf_delwri_submit_buffers Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-07  6:31   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-01-07  6:33     ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-06  9:54 ` [PATCH 07/15] xfs: move write verification out of _xfs_buf_ioapply Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-07  6:33   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-01-06  9:54 ` [PATCH 08/15] xfs: move in-memory buftarg handling " Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-07  6:34   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-01-06  9:54 ` [PATCH 09/15] xfs: simplify buffer I/O submission Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-07  6:42   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-01-07  6:46     ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-07  6:57       ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-01-06  9:54 ` [PATCH 10/15] xfs: move invalidate_kernel_vmap_range to xfs_buf_ioend Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-07  6:42   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-01-06  9:54 ` [PATCH 11/15] xfs: remove the extra buffer reference in xfs_buf_submit Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-13  7:13   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-01-06  9:54 ` [PATCH 12/15] xfs: always complete the buffer inline " Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-07  6:46   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-01-06  9:54 ` [PATCH 13/15] xfs: simplify xfsaild_resubmit_item Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-07  6:49   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-01-06  9:54 ` [PATCH 14/15] xfs: move b_li_list based retry handling to common code Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-07  6:55   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-01-07  7:03     ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-13  7:18       ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2025-01-06  9:54 ` [PATCH 15/15] xfs: add a b_iodone callback to struct xfs_buf Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-07  6:58   ` Darrick J. Wong
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2025-01-13 14:12 buffer cache cleanups v2 Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-13 14:12 ` [PATCH 14/15] xfs: move b_li_list based retry handling to common code 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=20250113071805.GB1306365@frogsfrogsfrogs \
    --to=djwong@kernel.org \
    --cc=cem@kernel.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --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