From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (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 B613A8F5E for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2025 07:35:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736408112; cv=none; b=WYCWkxOSO1QjyA7Lf6AVqRg9AsAMu1QNruOBh4fk3cETHMgD/pqIvhE80SJN2ByWKphxcBR2QZ435C3EkBHA0KCmtnyUIPc+L5bDrBXVtBHB+9Xmq8wdlBgI5cKMecFbjwugjTJAe0JML6lzMrhYDMK+A2lYDWlUM9besMvkEzg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736408112; c=relaxed/simple; bh=e0NFOjJ5wXR9PaNpuBCIi3YOpJUX7DR/E3kUPuItWHw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=TGOBwMf4B0md/NtofxyPj941CZG1VkjaNCIDbG3jCBWrOQWkDvSGuyTgOTJNI3AWg1J8k6zuZzXbLcTTxmlne1nGOauXIhDJralgFHMzBmC0CwlvZZWGTQ72cgE+r9VWfqO0R20ZlYhHoedqG7v1rhEdBotsNZYKZMFmAMa0Y/w= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=sjsS3NdH; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="sjsS3NdH" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version :References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=bpbP8LddktbORolKAOpTBhkauzXxjBY+ChLCNpGWzGg=; b=sjsS3NdH9YJkDICaA165OSNNy/ JaVWsxmBEWNlW+T73nDnn1YPVjuS8Z8wkBtrA6koOokIUoSvrunCJdYNBWoPsFSjYhnqLmg01fLYp 78BJIO5UJUjCTJp0WtCbl2RisFPbQixIXpdy9K5TwQZ317/NNI2LnbMBVLjMdQAYSzvr4h1/UyIAz BDXBq4pF9InSQM4YGqVFa/gdox9IOxih/onoprgYgWPdJ5uwPwxDl3dUJiSoDQv3hP1yRUEH4LXsV VOj/N266AfjUB+7aMDzbtZVG/z32ltJG0kaa9Y/u+hsak07wN9ni7SrUOt8E7cUihlT3AnLxgvlUh Fl8cHWYw==; Received: from hch by bombadil.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1tVn4Q-0000000B3xv-0y9V; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 07:35:10 +0000 Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2025 23:35:10 -0800 From: Christoph Hellwig To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Carlos Maiolino , xfs Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: lock dquot buffer before detaching dquot from b_li_list Message-ID: References: <20250109005402.GH1387004@frogsfrogsfrogs> <20250109071718.GO1306365@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: <20250109071718.GO1306365@frogsfrogsfrogs> X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org. See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 11:17:18PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > I did look a bit over how the inode items handles the equivalent > > functionality, and AFAICS there is no direct one. xfs_qm_dquot_isolate > > is for shrinking the dquot LRU, which is handled through the VFS > > for inodes. xfs_qm_dqpurge tries to write back dirty dquots, which > > I thought is dead code as all dirty dquots should have log > > items and thus be handled through the log and AIL, but it seems like > > xfs_qm_quotacheck_dqadjust dirties dquots without logging them. > > So we'll need that for now, but I wonder if we should convert this > > last bit of meatada to also go through our normal log mechanism > > eventually? > > What if we replace it with the one in scrub/repair_quotacheck.c? :) Yes, that's a much better implementation. It will probably be a while until we can get everyone convinced to actually build the online repair code into their kernels, though and I'm not sure if it's feasibable to have a subset just for quotacheck.