[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201104095229.GA5600@quack2.suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:52:29 +0100
From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To: harshad shirwadkar <harshadshirwadkar@...il.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
"Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10] ext4: mark fc ineligible if inode gets evictied
due to mem pressure
On Tue 03-11-20 10:33:47, harshad shirwadkar wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 6:13 AM Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> wrote:
> > > diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> > > index b96a18679a27..52ff71236290 100644
> > > --- a/fs/ext4/inode.c
> > > +++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> > > @@ -327,6 +327,7 @@ void ext4_evict_inode(struct inode *inode)
> > > ext4_xattr_inode_array_free(ea_inode_array);
> > > return;
> > > no_delete:
> > > + ext4_fc_mark_ineligible(inode->i_sb, EXT4_FC_REASON_MEM_CRUNCH);
> > > ext4_clear_inode(inode); /* We must guarantee clearing of inode... */
> > > }
> >
> > This will make fs ineligible on every inode reclaim. Even if the inode was
> > clean, not part of any FC. I guess this is too aggressive...
> Right, I missed that, so first checking if the inode is on FC list and
> then marking the FS as ineligible should suffice?
Yes, that looks good to me.
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>
SUSE Labs, CR
Powered by blists - more mailing lists