linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Qi Zheng <qi.zheng@linux.dev>
To: akpm@linux-foundation.org, tkhai@ya.ru, roman.gushchin@linux.dev,
	vbabka@suse.cz, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, brauner@kernel.org,
	djwong@kernel.org, hughd@google.com, paulmck@kernel.org,
	muchun.song@linux.dev
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
Subject: [PATCH 4/8] fs: shrink only (SB_ACTIVE|SB_BORN) superblocks in super_cache_scan()
Date: Wed, 31 May 2023 09:57:38 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230531095742.2480623-5-qi.zheng@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230531095742.2480623-1-qi.zheng@linux.dev>

From: Kirill Tkhai <tkhai@ya.ru>

This patch prepares superblock shrinker for delayed unregistering.
It makes super_cache_scan() avoid shrinking of not active superblocks.
SB_ACTIVE is used as such the indicator. In case of superblock is not
active, super_cache_scan() just exits with SHRINK_STOP as result.

Note, that SB_ACTIVE is cleared in generic_shutdown_super() and this
is made under the write lock of s_umount. Function super_cache_scan()
also takes the read lock of s_umount, so it can't skip this flag cleared.

SB_BORN check is added to super_cache_scan() just for uniformity
with super_cache_count(), while super_cache_count() received SB_ACTIVE
check just for uniformity with super_cache_scan().

After this patch super_cache_scan() becomes to ignore unregistering
superblocks, so this function is OK with splitting unregister_shrinker().
Next patches prepare super_cache_count() to follow this way.

Signed-off-by: Kirill Tkhai <tkhai@ya.ru>
Signed-off-by: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
---
 fs/super.c | 8 +++++++-
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/super.c b/fs/super.c
index 2ce4c72720f3..2ce54561e82e 100644
--- a/fs/super.c
+++ b/fs/super.c
@@ -79,6 +79,11 @@ static unsigned long super_cache_scan(struct shrinker *shrink,
 	if (!trylock_super(sb))
 		return SHRINK_STOP;
 
+	if ((sb->s_flags & (SB_BORN|SB_ACTIVE)) != (SB_BORN|SB_ACTIVE)) {
+		freed = SHRINK_STOP;
+		goto unlock;
+	}
+
 	if (sb->s_op->nr_cached_objects)
 		fs_objects = sb->s_op->nr_cached_objects(sb, sc);
 
@@ -110,6 +115,7 @@ static unsigned long super_cache_scan(struct shrinker *shrink,
 		freed += sb->s_op->free_cached_objects(sb, sc);
 	}
 
+unlock:
 	up_read(&sb->s_umount);
 	return freed;
 }
@@ -136,7 +142,7 @@ static unsigned long super_cache_count(struct shrinker *shrink,
 	 * avoid this situation, so do the same here. The memory barrier is
 	 * matched with the one in mount_fs() as we don't hold locks here.
 	 */
-	if (!(sb->s_flags & SB_BORN))
+	if ((sb->s_flags & (SB_BORN|SB_ACTIVE)) != (SB_BORN|SB_ACTIVE))
 		return 0;
 	smp_rmb();
 
-- 
2.30.2



  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-05-31  9:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-05-31  9:57 [PATCH 0/8] make unregistration of super_block shrinker more faster Qi Zheng
2023-05-31  9:57 ` [PATCH 1/8] mm: vmscan: move shrinker_debugfs_remove() before synchronize_srcu() Qi Zheng
2023-05-31 10:49   ` Christian Brauner
2023-05-31 12:52     ` Qi Zheng
2023-05-31  9:57 ` [PATCH 2/8] mm: vmscan: split unregister_shrinker() Qi Zheng
2023-05-31  9:57 ` [PATCH 3/8] fs: move list_lru_destroy() to destroy_super_work() Qi Zheng
2023-05-31  9:57 ` Qi Zheng [this message]
2023-05-31  9:57 ` [PATCH 5/8] fs: introduce struct super_operations::destroy_super() callback Qi Zheng
2023-05-31 11:19   ` Christian Brauner
2023-05-31 12:54     ` Qi Zheng
2023-05-31  9:57 ` [PATCH 6/8] xfs: introduce xfs_fs_destroy_super() Qi Zheng
2023-05-31  9:57 ` [PATCH 7/8] shmem: implement shmem_destroy_super() Qi Zheng
2023-05-31  9:57 ` [PATCH 8/8] fs: use unregister_shrinker_delayed_{initiate, finalize} for super_block shrinker Qi Zheng

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=20230531095742.2480623-5-qi.zheng@linux.dev \
    --to=qi.zheng@linux.dev \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=djwong@kernel.org \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
    --cc=tkhai@ya.ru \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com \
    /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).