On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 2:55 AM Roman Gushchin <guro@xxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 04:56:36PM +0800, Muchun Song wrote: > > The allocated inode cache is supposed to be added to its memcg list_lru > > which should be allocated as well in advance. That can be done by > > kmem_cache_alloc_lru() which allocates object and list_lru. The file > > systems is main user of it. So introduce alloc_inode_sb() to allocate > > file system specific inodes and set up the inode reclaim context > > properly. The file system is supposed to use alloc_inode_sb() to > > allocate inodes. In the later patches, we will convert all users to the > > new API. > > > > Signed-off-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > Documentation/filesystems/porting.rst | 5 +++++ > > fs/inode.c | 2 +- > > include/linux/fs.h | 11 +++++++++++ > > 3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/porting.rst b/Documentation/filesystems/porting.rst > > index bf19fd6b86e7..c9c157d7b7bb 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/filesystems/porting.rst > > +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/porting.rst > > @@ -45,6 +45,11 @@ typically between calling iget_locked() and unlocking the inode. > > > > At some point that will become mandatory. > > > > +**mandatory** > > + > > +The foo_inode_info should always be allocated through alloc_inode_sb() rather > > +than kmem_cache_alloc() or kmalloc() related. > > I'd add a couple of words on why it has to be allocated this way. Will do. > > + > > --- > > Reviewed-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@xxxxxx> Thanks.
