Re: [PATCH 2/3] xfs: drop IDONTCACHE on inodes when we mark them sick

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 08:12:46PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> When we decide to mark an inode sick, clear the DONTCACHE flag so that
> the incore inode will be kept around until memory pressure forces it out
> of memory.  This increases the chances that the sick status will be
> caught by someone compiling a health report later on.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  fs/xfs/xfs_health.c |    5 +++++
>  fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c |    3 ++-
>  2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> 
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_health.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_health.c
> index 8e0cb05a7142..824e0b781290 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_health.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_health.c
> @@ -231,6 +231,11 @@ xfs_inode_mark_sick(
>  	ip->i_sick |= mask;
>  	ip->i_checked |= mask;
>  	spin_unlock(&ip->i_flags_lock);
> +
> +	/* Keep this inode around so we don't lose the sickness report. */
> +	spin_lock(&VFS_I(ip)->i_lock);
> +	VFS_I(ip)->i_state &= ~I_DONTCACHE;
> +	spin_unlock(&VFS_I(ip)->i_lock);

If I follow the scrub code correctly, it will grab a dontcache reference
on the inode, so presumably the intent here is to clear that status once
we've identified some problem to keep the inode around. Seems
reasonable.

>  }
>  
>  /* Mark parts of an inode healed. */
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c
> index c3f912a9231b..0e2b6c05e604 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c
> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@
>  #include "xfs_dquot.h"
>  #include "xfs_reflink.h"
>  #include "xfs_ialloc.h"
> +#include "xfs_health.h"
>  
>  #include <linux/iversion.h>
>  
> @@ -648,7 +649,7 @@ xfs_iget_cache_miss(
>  	 * time.
>  	 */
>  	iflags = XFS_INEW;
> -	if (flags & XFS_IGET_DONTCACHE)
> +	if ((flags & XFS_IGET_DONTCACHE) && xfs_inode_is_healthy(ip))
>  		d_mark_dontcache(VFS_I(ip));

This one I'm less clear on.. we've just allocated ip above and haven't
made it accessible yet. What's the use case for finding an unhealthy
inode here?

Brian

>  	ip->i_udquot = NULL;
>  	ip->i_gdquot = NULL;
> 




[Index of Archives]     [XFS Filesystem Development (older mail)]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Trails]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux