On Wed 21-11-12 13:44:05, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 02:48:51AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c
> > index 51ea267..3e3422f 100644
> > --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c
> > +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c
> > @@ -228,6 +228,8 @@ static void requeue_io(struct inode *inode, struct bdi_writeback *wb)
> > static void inode_sync_complete(struct inode *inode)
> > {
> > inode->i_state &= ~I_SYNC;
> > + /* If inode is clean an unused, put it into LRU now... */
> > + inode_add_lru(inode);
> > /* Waiters must see I_SYNC cleared before being woken up */
> > smp_mb();
> > wake_up_bit(&inode->i_state, __I_SYNC);
> > diff --git a/fs/inode.c b/fs/inode.c
> > index b03c719..8f6396f 100644
> > --- a/fs/inode.c
> > +++ b/fs/inode.c
> > @@ -408,6 +408,19 @@ static void inode_lru_list_add(struct inode *inode)
> > spin_unlock(&inode->i_sb->s_inode_lru_lock);
> > }
> >
> > +/*
> > + * Add inode to LRU if needed (inode is unused and clean).
> > + *
> > + * Needs inode->i_lock held.
> > + */
> > +void inode_add_lru(struct inode *inode)
> > +{
> > + if (!(inode->i_state & (I_DIRTY | I_FREEING | I_SYNC)) &&
> > + !atomic_read(&inode->i_count) && inode->i_sb->s_flags & MS_ACTIVE)
> > + inode_lru_list_add(inode);
>
> Needs to avoid I_WILL_FREE as well. There's no point putting it on
> the LRU if we are writing from iput_final()....
Yeah, it won't cause any real problems but you are right it's not useful
to put such inodes into the LRU. I'll send v3 in a moment, now as a proper
patch submission since we seem to agree...
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
