From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>,
Linux Filesystem Development List
<linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] writeback: avoid double-writing the inode on a lazytime expiration
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 22:46:39 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200320024639.GH1067245@mit.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200312143445.GA19160@infradead.org>
On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 07:34:45AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> I haven't seen the original mail this replies to, but if we could
> get the lazytime expirty by some other means (e.g. an explicit
> callback), XFS could opt out of all the VFS inode tracking again,
> which would simplify a few things.
Part of my thinking of calling
inode->i_sb->s_op->dirty_inode(inode, I_DIRTY_TIME_EXPIRED);
So that it would be an explicit callback to XFS. So why don't I break
this as two patches --- one which uses I_DIRTY_SYNC, as before, and a
second one which changes calls dirty_inode() with
I_DIRTY_TIME_EXPIRED, and with a change to XFS so that it recognizes
I_DIRTY_TIME_EXPIRED as if it were I_DIRTY_SYNC. If this would then
allow XFS to simplify how it handles VFS tracking, you could do that
in a separate patch.
Does that work? I'll send out the two patches, and if you can
review/ack the second patch, that would be great.
- Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-20 2:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-06 0:45 lazytime causing inodes to remain dirty after sync? Eric Biggers
2020-03-07 2:00 ` [PATCH] writeback: avoid double-writing the inode on a lazytime expiration Theodore Ts'o
2020-03-11 3:20 ` Eric Biggers
2020-03-11 12:57 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-03-12 0:07 ` Dave Chinner
2020-03-12 14:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-03-12 22:39 ` Dave Chinner
2020-03-20 2:46 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o [this message]
2020-03-20 2:52 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Theodore Ts'o
2020-03-20 2:52 ` [PATCH 2/2] writeback, xfs: call dirty_inode() with I_DIRTY_TIME_EXPIRED when appropriate Theodore Ts'o
2020-03-23 17:58 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-03-24 8:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-03-24 18:43 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-03-25 9:20 ` [PATCH 1/2] writeback: avoid double-writing the inode on a lazytime expiration Christoph Hellwig
2020-03-25 15:21 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-03-25 15:47 ` Darrick J. Wong
2020-03-11 23:54 ` [PATCH] " Dave Chinner
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=20200320024639.GH1067245@mit.edu \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=ebiggers@kernel.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).