From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mout-p-101.mailbox.org (mout-p-101.mailbox.org [80.241.56.151]) (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 B8BEF18991B; Tue, 20 Aug 2024 09:18:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=80.241.56.151 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1724145498; cv=none; b=hTlko+BQpGReLGDEQ6aduQb1XrMo0t5S0OCoA9FaRXgTJGSTngZeaMfxDssCeAho5B40YBFKvBrcSnuevMuRM2QVcf4FV1nttJLdKcjhVbF0K+ro5kh0mj5ROmKoMMyljtM++hZP3eD/7ETqwvfY4Gl4pReFlKdvevAMCQ8HMCs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1724145498; c=relaxed/simple; bh=bW0QWsueAOcspiCecWtg2SVyi4gHSZ6HSezrXT5+Pyo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=AjfpbO33iONiwsFAfXLXC+x0eo4wlyu4wl7qOyGFw7GiHXq6FTnAr2T1BwT9SfTsGOJjmykcTNCn1UECipRNMg869QXdL/cAbjIkFhcNzRl5CvO7Itw/byV7tSYiHXvOpiE1ZhNgwW6FRyoNm7GzBAll+5p1w/ubjoqWj37eQ7g= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=pankajraghav.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pankajraghav.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pankajraghav.com header.i=@pankajraghav.com header.b=1TpC3XNR; arc=none smtp.client-ip=80.241.56.151 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=pankajraghav.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pankajraghav.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pankajraghav.com header.i=@pankajraghav.com header.b="1TpC3XNR" Received: from smtp2.mailbox.org (smtp2.mailbox.org [10.196.197.2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mout-p-101.mailbox.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Wp3lz2FtCz9sbL; Tue, 20 Aug 2024 11:18:07 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pankajraghav.com; s=MBO0001; t=1724145487; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=f+ICdms72HfoF4mAv99/z3Z6CJn/38fKcvyPjiB+emU=; b=1TpC3XNRabaGO7N5sW4gKUNX5AldqRHL0F+Q59ySDOOMW11dpqYvmdHXKrjFzE9+kEuAZc xD7L+OQgpO1UWy0xxTYs0ehlCqmrkOSejl8Sm3hgg0pwypovKKLdlPC/yO9YEUWCttiG55 585Ut50eLrkQdYnUR3ZqzFFJnbXHKWs/A4N4A1YpvDJWifoBUhRebkRmuajq9lQ5LZSKH3 Btk12vH/oJvaKJsnGa20r52My7EROT0wIyldnP6WuodgZr9oQp+zzd5CpdUeCOABlVJ6Fk olyyXoEJURraAgRQFMmi/973uUUnaxScwem2gEIjqq1nD6LuiZXVyiVaIwY4Cg== Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2024 09:17:59 +0000 From: "Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)" To: David Howells Cc: brauner@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, chandan.babu@oracle.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, djwong@kernel.org, hare@suse.de, gost.dev@samsung.com, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, hch@lst.de, david@fromorbit.com, Zi Yan , yang@os.amperecomputing.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, willy@infradead.org, john.g.garry@oracle.com, cl@os.amperecomputing.com, p.raghav@samsung.com, mcgrof@kernel.org, ryan.roberts@arm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 00/10] enable bs > ps in XFS Message-ID: <20240820091759.vogo5uxaldvik2u2@quentin> References: <20240819163938.qtsloyko67cqrmb6@quentin> <20240818165124.7jrop5sgtv5pjd3g@quentin> <20240815090849.972355-1-kernel@pankajraghav.com> <2924797.1723836663@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <3402933.1724068015@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <3458347.1724092844@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@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: <3458347.1724092844@warthog.procyon.org.uk> On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 07:40:44PM +0100, David Howells wrote: > Pankaj Raghav (Samsung) wrote: > > > I tried this code on XFS, and it is working as expected (I am getting > > xxxx). > > XFS doesn't try to use mapping_set_release_always(). Thanks David for digging deep. It is indeed a bug in this patchset (PATCH 1). I think I overlooked the way we MASK the folio order bits when we changed it sometime back. But still I don't know why AS_RELEASE_ALWAYS is being cleared because it is in BIT 6, and existing bug should not affect BIT 6. The following triggers an ASSERT failure. diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c index 0fcf235e5023..35961d73d54a 100644 --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c @@ -88,9 +88,13 @@ xfs_inode_alloc( /* VFS doesn't initialise i_mode! */ VFS_I(ip)->i_mode = 0; + mapping_set_unevictable(VFS_I(ip)->i_mapping); mapping_set_folio_min_order(VFS_I(ip)->i_mapping, M_IGEO(mp)->min_folio_order); + ASSERT(mapping_unevictable(VFS_I(ip)->i_mapping) == 1); + + mapping_clear_unevictable(VFS_I(ip)->i_mapping); XFS_STATS_INC(mp, vn_active); ASSERT(atomic_read(&ip->i_pincount) == 0); ASSERT(ip->i_ino == 0); The patch that fixes this is: diff --git a/include/linux/pagemap.h b/include/linux/pagemap.h index 61a7649d86e5..5e245b8dcfd6 100644 --- a/include/linux/pagemap.h +++ b/include/linux/pagemap.h @@ -217,6 +217,7 @@ enum mapping_flags { #define AS_FOLIO_ORDER_MASK ((1u << AS_FOLIO_ORDER_BITS) - 1) #define AS_FOLIO_ORDER_MIN_MASK (AS_FOLIO_ORDER_MASK << AS_FOLIO_ORDER_MIN) #define AS_FOLIO_ORDER_MAX_MASK (AS_FOLIO_ORDER_MASK << AS_FOLIO_ORDER_MAX) +#define AS_FOLIO_ORDER_MIN_MAX_MASK (AS_FOLIO_ORDER_MIN_MASK | AS_FOLIO_ORDER_MAX_MASK) /** * mapping_set_error - record a writeback error in the address_space @@ -418,7 +419,7 @@ static inline void mapping_set_folio_order_range(struct address_space *mapping, if (max < min) max = min; - mapping->flags = (mapping->flags & ~AS_FOLIO_ORDER_MASK) | + mapping->flags = (mapping->flags & ~AS_FOLIO_ORDER_MIN_MAX_MASK) | (min << AS_FOLIO_ORDER_MIN) | (max << AS_FOLIO_ORDER_MAX); } Could you try this patch and see if it fixes it by any chance? -- Pankaj