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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43D57C433F5 for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 07:41:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234704AbhKVHoR (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Nov 2021 02:44:17 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37866 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232870AbhKVHoQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Nov 2021 02:44:16 -0500 Received: from mail-io1-xd2d.google.com (mail-io1-xd2d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2d]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9041C061574; Sun, 21 Nov 2021 23:41:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-io1-xd2d.google.com with SMTP id f9so21917956ioo.11; Sun, 21 Nov 2021 23:41:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=EgK3Fxmt2Ep/12cKLL6aWGBCcDYN8BbadOm8B5KUg8E=; b=Oklkv7AgYAiXeDSbCLqFfwB1huhraxdAJZfZ5WjKYwXiTSqAK9bWfVy/HLCAJUQswM F6JvDDh51VfwJpvOgEN333Wqcli0rVQDggh5FcCrdBC49J7PswDOZQa14QEuRG2Adjj+ U78QVmNrh1lm/9s8PZakdnenBtmNERGsTjt4eMfd2tZeAb5cPI/heuYDrbwj7wZjm9YY A9bZCGffPphun2+TbuUoBGJa37IGJ1NgVNCFowOIjPSPePkrAGGqL/7C2oUyY5AcUUbI Adc5pHvGG70GlB7Ouo7ZE0R4UF8ZcNOtEd/H8jvOwMz7p4Yy2J82Uu931gxrSW3gtHwL GKdA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=EgK3Fxmt2Ep/12cKLL6aWGBCcDYN8BbadOm8B5KUg8E=; b=nw94UApv5LGdnoRZ2ZD7P5bREv4iEZ5D64L3HHt3zijH1W/wu8mWta7eqEf1RcZYmH DcaigWKV1lUXdxIyl59vtcEFM+XvHL2bgygRPQgmIPH5/PMM/Fm5FbfAKDn2f1JWbpsH s6tq2OnWY1tlClvZbLJ1DBEmRjBbmElfIp2o5M9KZSvGRUGJJXs1NidxqrBWXVBRFNjE KfVduuhscY/bUS94941ZyJTIKjxyt5VpZyP/RebehADU0tmJGJZjvg+R5Kf5U/JvxNVo 2MwaDQjPHB0Fz5PZiNgzGPBQFa0POUOwrN5D9uYoz2I5dJPVYhpvnky3vs0hsUcds+76 PIaw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532ypr8J+Q8Rc67waNF4C4jR3wusYeAswdOwcPC1OWWTAJl9BydQ JNRxoUFvkMGyxOi+M/AwSHdKhj2uy7Kp6puyyNFJRTKhW6k= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzzsjZNvfLzBRWCOI9wZkvYKWyX2dOOoZsNa7F089FqnSUQcaYN0/9aN2OVkz/DGXsQgjyVqsOAUowqlpCVPOw= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6602:26d0:: with SMTP id g16mr1885952ioo.70.1637566870216; Sun, 21 Nov 2021 23:41:10 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20211122030038.1938875-1-cgxu519@mykernel.net> <20211122030038.1938875-8-cgxu519@mykernel.net> In-Reply-To: <20211122030038.1938875-8-cgxu519@mykernel.net> From: Amir Goldstein Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 09:40:59 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH V6 7/7] ovl: implement containerized syncfs for overlayfs To: Chengguang Xu Cc: Miklos Szeredi , Jan Kara , overlayfs , linux-fsdevel , linux-kernel , Chengguang Xu Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 5:01 AM Chengguang Xu wrote: > > From: Chengguang Xu > > Now overlayfs can only sync own dirty inodes during syncfs, > so remove unnecessary sync_filesystem() on upper file system. > > Signed-off-by: Chengguang Xu > --- > fs/overlayfs/super.c | 14 +++++--------- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/super.c b/fs/overlayfs/super.c > index ccffcd96491d..213b795a6a86 100644 > --- a/fs/overlayfs/super.c > +++ b/fs/overlayfs/super.c > @@ -292,18 +292,14 @@ static int ovl_sync_fs(struct super_block *sb, int wait) > /* > * Not called for sync(2) call or an emergency sync (SB_I_SKIP_SYNC). > * All the super blocks will be iterated, including upper_sb. > - * > - * If this is a syncfs(2) call, then we do need to call > - * sync_filesystem() on upper_sb, but enough if we do it when being > - * called with wait == 1. > */ > - if (!wait) > - return 0; > - > upper_sb = ovl_upper_mnt(ofs)->mnt_sb; > - > down_read(&upper_sb->s_umount); > - ret = sync_filesystem(upper_sb); > + if (wait) > + wait_sb_inodes(upper_sb); > + if (upper_sb->s_op->sync_fs) > + upper_sb->s_op->sync_fs(upper_sb, wait); > + ret = ovl_sync_upper_blockdev(upper_sb, wait); I think it will be cleaner to use a helper ovl_sync_upper_filesystem() with everything from upper_sb = ... and a comment to explain that this is a variant of __sync_filesystem() where all the dirty inodes write have already been started. Thanks, Amir. P.S. I like this "stoopid proof" v6 because I can understand it ;-)