All of lore.kernel.org
 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  9:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ 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 22:57   ` Dave Chinner
2023-05-31  9:57 ` [PATCH 3/8] fs: move list_lru_destroy() to destroy_super_work() Qi Zheng
2023-05-31 23:00   ` Dave Chinner
2023-05-31  9:57 ` Qi Zheng [this message]
2023-05-31 23:12   ` [PATCH 4/8] fs: shrink only (SB_ACTIVE|SB_BORN) superblocks in super_cache_scan() Dave Chinner
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 23:48   ` Dave Chinner
2023-06-01  8:43     ` Qi Zheng
2023-06-01  9:58       ` Christian Brauner
2023-06-01 23:06       ` Dave Chinner
2023-06-02  3:13         ` Qi Zheng
2023-06-02 15:15           ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-06-05 11:50             ` Christian Brauner
2023-06-05 12:16               ` 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
     [not found] ` <20230531114054.bf077db642aa9c58c0831687@linux-foundation.org>
2023-06-01  8:46   ` [PATCH 0/8] make unregistration of super_block shrinker more faster 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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.