From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E7B3C47088 for ; Wed, 26 May 2021 15:25:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 645B1613D3 for ; Wed, 26 May 2021 15:25:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235531AbhEZP1O (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 May 2021 11:27:14 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:56200 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235600AbhEZP05 (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 May 2021 11:26:57 -0400 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8A6FB61378; Wed, 26 May 2021 15:25:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1622042725; bh=/uzTTNLjF88gVIvVPehwcj9E7+SDKIBIEbe1++RMcCA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=vQ7xuH3OSvQiH8WTyODIiNgCaa8VPSIlyo23vb9HtCWw7llMRo4A/QjKfRC588iEs cvBicODScd+zWU0/qy9HoNnaXPqGqeM7FPRW1d7eD3je2K9aXlvIXMfyoweXztaME1 I14haJq08cG54aoOyPVUR07m+a8Dp3PTJnGilKvamk99idXs9eZcznD7NKdNQgHXzw MCmHriw/JX66+IvWWdkHQ8tSWchzi7nZ3ymLuHxR3qrqa5nDnh77qs3pFVtTGrDfYH PdRj3qcJPIWztj+xrh/HZE/cXxl9nVGPOJbQzuoNKF2vnF6COWpAHtFpeZnx4It663 X4utnX24c9Niw== Date: Wed, 26 May 2021 08:25:25 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: Jan Kara Cc: Damien Le Moal , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "hch@infradead.org" , Dave Chinner , "ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org" , Chao Yu , "Darrick J. Wong" , Jaegeuk Kim , Jeff Layton , Johannes Thumshirn , "linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org" , Miklos Szeredi , Steve French , Ted Tso , Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/13] mm: Add functions to lock invalidate_lock for two mappings Message-ID: <20210526152525.GY202121@locust> References: <20210525125652.20457-1-jack@suse.cz> <20210525135100.11221-4-jack@suse.cz> <20210525204805.GM202121@locust> <20210526100702.GB30369@quack2.suse.cz> <20210526134518.GF30369@quack2.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210526134518.GF30369@quack2.suse.cz> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 03:45:18PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > On Wed 26-05-21 12:11:43, Damien Le Moal wrote: > > On 2021/05/26 19:07, Jan Kara wrote: > > > On Tue 25-05-21 13:48:05, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > >> On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 03:50:41PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > >>> Some operations such as reflinking blocks among files will need to lock > > >>> invalidate_lock for two mappings. Add helper functions to do that. > > >>> > > >>> Signed-off-by: Jan Kara > > >>> --- > > >>> include/linux/fs.h | 6 ++++++ > > >>> mm/filemap.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > >>> 2 files changed, 44 insertions(+) > > >>> > > >>> diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h > > >>> index 897238d9f1e0..e6f7447505f5 100644 > > >>> --- a/include/linux/fs.h > > >>> +++ b/include/linux/fs.h > > >>> @@ -822,6 +822,12 @@ static inline void inode_lock_shared_nested(struct inode *inode, unsigned subcla > > >>> void lock_two_nondirectories(struct inode *, struct inode*); > > >>> void unlock_two_nondirectories(struct inode *, struct inode*); > > >>> > > >>> +void filemap_invalidate_down_write_two(struct address_space *mapping1, > > >>> + struct address_space *mapping2); > > >>> +void filemap_invalidate_up_write_two(struct address_space *mapping1, > > >> > > >> TBH I find myself wishing that the invalidate_lock used the same > > >> lock/unlock style wrappers that we use for i_rwsem. > > >> > > >> filemap_invalidate_lock(inode1->mapping); > > >> filemap_invalidate_lock_two(inode1->i_mapping, inode2->i_mapping); > > > > > > OK, and filemap_invalidate_lock_shared() for down_read()? I guess that > > > works for me. > > > > What about filemap_invalidate_lock_read() and filemap_invalidate_lock_write() ? > > That reminds the down_read()/down_write() without the slightly confusing down/up. > > Well, if we go for lock wrappers as Darrick suggested, I'd mirror naming > used for inode_lock(). That is IMO the least confusing option... And that > naming has _lock and _lock_shared suffixes. I'd like filemap_invalidate_lock and filemap_invalidate_lock_shared. --D > > Honza > > -- > Jan Kara > SUSE Labs, CR