The Linux Kernel Mailing List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: Javier Tia <javier@peridio.com>
Cc: Carlos Maiolino <cem@kernel.org>,
	Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>,
	Allison Henderson <allison.henderson@oracle.com>,
	Andrey Albershteyn <aalbersh@kernel.org>,
	linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] xfs: correct the parent pointer space reservation comment
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 11:55:46 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260809185546.GS7398@frogsfrogsfrogs> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260808234016.246054-11-floss@jetm.me>

On Sat, Aug 08, 2026 at 05:40:21PM -0600, Javier Tia wrote:
> The comment on xfs_parent_calc_space_res() claims parent pointers are
> "always the first attr in an attr tree".  They are not: a parent pointer
> is recorded per dirent, so an inode with N hardlinks carries N of them,
> and `xfs_io -c "parent -p"` on a 31-link file lists 31.  By the Nth link
> the attr fork is in leaf or node format and the insert is not into a
> fresh tree.
> 
> The reservation itself is fine, which is what makes the comment worth
> fixing rather than the code.  XFS_DAENTER_SPACE_RES() reserves
> XFS_DA_NODE_MAXDEPTH blocks plus a bmap allowance for each, i.e. enough
> to split every level of a maximum-depth attr dabtree.  That depth is a
> format ceiling, not a runtime property, so the result cannot depend on
> the format the fork happens to be in.  Anyone auditing a reservation
> shortfall here reads the comment, concludes the sizing rests on an
> assumption that demonstrably does not hold, and goes looking for a bug
> that is not there.
> 
> Record why no double split allowance is needed either, since that is one
> of two visible differences from xfs_attr_calc_size() and is not obvious
> from the expression: a parent pointer's name is a dirent name and its
> value is a struct xfs_parent_rec, so the leaf entry is local and at most
> round_up(3 + 255 + 12, 4) = 272 bytes.  Parent pointers require V5 and
> therefore XFS_MIN_CRC_BLOCKSIZE, so the smallest half-block this can be
> compared against is 512 and the double split branch is unreachable on
> every mountable geometry.  Locality is decided against a different
> threshold, xfs_attr_leaf_entsize_local_max() at three quarters of a
> block, which the 272 bytes also clears.
> 
> Record the other difference too.  The second term hands a byte count to
> XFS_NEXTENTADD_SPACE_RES(), whose parameter counts mappings, so it asks
> for more extent-add allowance than the one mapping a parent pointer
> adds.  The factor depends on the block size, because the macro divides
> by XFS_MAX_CONTIG_EXTENTS_PER_BLOCK(), so the comment says only that it
> over-reserves - a patch whose whole point is that the old comment stated
> a geometry-dependent thing as invariant should not do the same.  That it
> over-reserves is why it is not a bug and why this patch leaves it alone.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Javier Tia <floss@jetm.me>
> ---
>  fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_trans_space.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_trans_space.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_trans_space.c
> index 9b8f495c9049..c4cd547033e5 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_trans_space.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_trans_space.c
> @@ -22,8 +22,23 @@ xfs_parent_calc_space_res(
>  	unsigned int		namelen)
>  {
>  	/*
> -	 * Parent pointers are always the first attr in an attr tree, and never
> -	 * larger than a block
> +	 * A parent pointer is recorded per dirent, so an inode with N links
> +	 * carries N of them and the attr fork can already be in leaf or node
> +	 * format when one is added.  That does not affect the reservation:
> +	 * XFS_DAENTER_SPACE_RES covers a split at every level of a
> +	 * maximum-depth attr dabtree, whatever format the fork is in now.
> +	 *
> +	 * The name is a dirent name and the value is a struct xfs_parent_rec,
> +	 * so the leaf entry is always local and never exceeds 272 bytes.
> +	 * Parent pointers require V5, hence a 1k minimum block size, so the
> +	 * entry always stays under half a block and this needs none of the
> +	 * double split allowance that xfs_attr_calc_size() makes.
> +	 *
> +	 * The second term hands a byte count to a macro whose parameter counts
> +	 * mappings, so it asks for more extent-add allowance than the single
> +	 * mapping a parent pointer adds - how much more depends on the block
> +	 * size.  It over-reserves either way, which is why it is left alone:
> +	 * correcting the unit would shrink a reservation that is only generous.

We should probably reduce this some day (new feature bit), but in the
meantime this checks out.  The commit message could be a lot shorter
since you don't need to reiterate the diff there....

Reviewed-by: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>

--D

>  	 */
>  	return XFS_DAENTER_SPACE_RES(mp, XFS_ATTR_FORK) +
>  	       XFS_NEXTENTADD_SPACE_RES(mp, namelen, XFS_ATTR_FORK);
> -- 
> Javier Tia
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2026-08-09 18:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-08 23:40 [PATCH 0/5] xfs: fix filesystem shutdown from parent pointer reservation underflow Javier Tia
2026-08-08 23:40 ` [PATCH 1/5] xfs: initialise error in xfs_defer_finish_one() Javier Tia
2026-08-09 18:48   ` Darrick J. Wong
2026-08-08 23:40 ` [PATCH 2/5] xfs: give the deferred barrier op type a name Javier Tia
2026-08-09 18:49   ` Darrick J. Wong
2026-08-08 23:40 ` [PATCH 3/5] xfs: report the error that made deferred work shut down the fs Javier Tia
2026-08-08 23:40 ` [PATCH 4/5] xfs: correct the parent pointer space reservation comment Javier Tia
2026-08-09 18:55   ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2026-08-08 23:40 ` [PATCH 5/5] xfs: initialise args->total for parent pointer updates Javier Tia

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=20260809185546.GS7398@frogsfrogsfrogs \
    --to=djwong@kernel.org \
    --cc=aalbersh@kernel.org \
    --cc=allison.henderson@oracle.com \
    --cc=cem@kernel.org \
    --cc=dchinner@redhat.com \
    --cc=javier@peridio.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.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