[GIT PULL] bring back RT delalloc support

[GIT PULL] bring back RT delalloc support

[Christoph Hellwig]

Hi Chandan,

Please pull this branch with changes for 6.10-rc:

The following changes since commit f2e812c1522dab847912309b00abcc762dd696da:

  xfs: don't use current->journal_info (2024-03-25 10:21:01 +0530)

are available in the Git repository at:

  git://git.infradead.org/users/hch/xfs.git tags/xfs-realtime-delalloc-2024-04-02

for you to fetch changes up to e3b3bbc181dedebc4192f938c98699e127d70c8e:

  xfs: reinstate delalloc for RT inodes (if sb_rextsize == 1) (2024-03-28 09:19:53 +0100)

----------------------------------------------------------------
xfs:  bring back RT delalloc support

Add back delalloc support for RT inodes, at least if the RT
extent size is a single file system block.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Christoph Hellwig (12):
      xfs: make XFS_TRANS_LOWMODE match the other XFS_TRANS_ definitions
      xfs: free RT extents after updating the bmap btree
      xfs: move RT inode locking out of __xfs_bunmapi
      xfs: block deltas in xfs_trans_unreserve_and_mod_sb must be positive
      xfs: split xfs_mod_freecounter
      xfs: reinstate RT support in xfs_bmapi_reserve_delalloc
      xfs: cleanup fdblock/frextent accounting in xfs_bmap_del_extent_delay
      xfs: support RT inodes in xfs_mod_delalloc
      xfs: look at m_frextents in xfs_iomap_prealloc_size for RT allocations
      xfs: rework splitting of indirect block reservations
      xfs: stop the steal (of data blocks for RT indirect blocks)
      xfs: reinstate delalloc for RT inodes (if sb_rextsize == 1)

Darrick J. Wong (1):
      xfs: refactor realtime inode locking

 fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_ag.c           |   4 +-
 fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_ag_resv.c      |  24 ++-----
 fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_ag_resv.h      |   2 +-
 fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_alloc.c        |   4 +-
 fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c         | 152 +++++++++++++++++++--------------------
 fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_rtbitmap.c     |  57 +++++++++++++++
 fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_rtbitmap.h     |  17 +++++
 fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_shared.h       |   6 +-
 fs/xfs/scrub/common.c            |   1 +
 fs/xfs/scrub/fscounters.c        |  12 ++--
 fs/xfs/scrub/fscounters.h        |   1 +
 fs/xfs/scrub/fscounters_repair.c |  12 +++-
 fs/xfs/scrub/repair.c            |   5 +-
 fs/xfs/xfs_fsmap.c               |   4 +-
 fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c               |  29 +++-----
 fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.h               |   2 +-
 fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c               |   3 +-
 fs/xfs/xfs_iomap.c               |  45 ++++++++----
 fs/xfs/xfs_iops.c                |   2 +-
 fs/xfs/xfs_mount.c               |  85 +++++++++++++---------
 fs/xfs/xfs_mount.h               |  36 +++++++---
 fs/xfs/xfs_rtalloc.c             |  22 +++---
 fs/xfs/xfs_super.c               |  17 +++--
 fs/xfs/xfs_trace.h               |   1 -
 fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c               |  63 ++++++++--------
 25 files changed, 358 insertions(+), 248 deletions(-)

Re: [GIT PULL] bring back RT delalloc support

[Chandan Babu R]

On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 02:50:15 PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Hi Chandan,
>
> Please pull this branch with changes for 6.10-rc:
>
> The following changes since commit f2e812c1522dab847912309b00abcc762dd696da:
>
>   xfs: don't use current->journal_info (2024-03-25 10:21:01 +0530)
>
> are available in the Git repository at:
>
>   git://git.infradead.org/users/hch/xfs.git tags/xfs-realtime-delalloc-2024-04-02

Christoph, The tag "xfs-realtime-delalloc-2024-04-02" is missing your
Signed-of-by. Also, could you please rebase your patches on top of v6.9-rc4? I
start applying patches for the next merge window on top of x.y-rc4.

I just checked that your patches indeed apply cleanly on 6.9-rc4.

-- 
Chandan

Re: [GIT PULL] bring back RT delalloc support

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 02:11:16PM +0530, Chandan Babu R wrote:
> Christoph, The tag "xfs-realtime-delalloc-2024-04-02" is missing your
> Signed-of-by

Tags aren't suppsoed to have signoffs.

>
> . Also, could you please rebase your patches on top of v6.9-rc4? I
> start applying patches for the next merge window on top of x.y-rc4.

Sure.

Re: [GIT PULL] bring back RT delalloc support

[Chandan Babu R]

On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 03:31:56 AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 02:11:16PM +0530, Chandan Babu R wrote:
>> Christoph, The tag "xfs-realtime-delalloc-2024-04-02" is missing your
>> Signed-of-by
>
> Tags aren't suppsoed to have signoffs.
>

That article at https://docs.kernel.org/maintainer/pull-requests.html mentions
that a Signed-off-by is required i.e.

'The tag message format is just like a git commit id. One line at the top for
a “summary subject” and be sure to sign-off at the bottom.'

-- 
Chandan

Re: [GIT PULL] bring back RT delalloc support

[Chandan Babu R]

On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 03:31:56 AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 02:11:16PM +0530, Chandan Babu R wrote:
>>
>> . Also, could you please rebase your patches on top of v6.9-rc4? I
>> start applying patches for the next merge window on top of x.y-rc4.
>
> Sure.

Christoph, I have pulled in many patches for v6.10-rc1 and am now encountering
merge conflicts with your "spring cleaning for xfs_extent_busy_clear"
patchset. Hence, please hold on until I update for-next branch. You could
rebase both the patchesets once the for-next branch is updated.

-- 
Chandan

Re: [GIT PULL] bring back RT delalloc support

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 06:23:26PM +0530, Chandan Babu R wrote:
> Christoph, I have pulled in many patches for v6.10-rc1 and am now encountering
> merge conflicts with your "spring cleaning for xfs_extent_busy_clear"
> patchset.

That shouldn't really conflict with this series.  It's also not anywhere
near as important.

> Hence, please hold on until I update for-next branch. You could
> rebase both the patchesets once the for-next branch is updated.

Ok.  And I'll give up on the pull requests as they seem to cause more
trouble than they are useful.

Re: [GIT PULL] bring back RT delalloc support

[Darrick J. Wong]

On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 09:30:06AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 06:23:26PM +0530, Chandan Babu R wrote:
> > Christoph, I have pulled in many patches for v6.10-rc1 and am now encountering
> > merge conflicts with your "spring cleaning for xfs_extent_busy_clear"
> > patchset.
> 
> That shouldn't really conflict with this series.  It's also not anywhere
> near as important.
> 
> > Hence, please hold on until I update for-next branch. You could
> > rebase both the patchesets once the for-next branch is updated.
> 
> Ok.  And I'll give up on the pull requests as they seem to cause more
> trouble than they are useful.

The trick with that (or so I've found) is either to send reams of
patches for the release manager to integrate manually (ala the old way)
or to load up all your branches one after the other and send pull
requests for all of them at once.  Mixing the two leads to frustration.

--D