Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] cachefiles: flush all requests for the object that is being dropped

[Baokun Li]

On 2024/6/27 23:18, Christian Brauner wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 07:20:16PM GMT, Baokun Li wrote:
> > On 2024/6/27 19:01, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2024-05-15 at 20:51 +0800, libaokun@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > > From: Baokun Li <libaokun1@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > Because after an object is dropped, requests for that object are
> > > > useless,
> > > > flush them to avoid causing other problems.
> > > >
> > > > This prepares for the later addition of cancel_work_sync(). After the
> > > > reopen requests is generated, flush it to avoid cancel_work_sync()
> > > > blocking by waiting for daemon to complete the reopen requests.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Baokun Li <libaokun1@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > >    fs/cachefiles/ondemand.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
> > > >    1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/fs/cachefiles/ondemand.c b/fs/cachefiles/ondemand.c
> > > > index 73da4d4eaa9b..d24bff43499b 100644
> > > > --- a/fs/cachefiles/ondemand.c
> > > > +++ b/fs/cachefiles/ondemand.c
> > > > @@ -564,12 +564,31 @@ int cachefiles_ondemand_init_object(struct
> > > > cachefiles_object *object)
> > > >    void cachefiles_ondemand_clean_object(struct cachefiles_object
> > > > *object)
> > > >    {
> > > > +	unsigned long index;
> > > > +	struct cachefiles_req *req;
> > > > +	struct cachefiles_cache *cache;
> > > > +
> > > >    	if (!object->ondemand)
> > > >    		return;
> > > >    	cachefiles_ondemand_send_req(object, CACHEFILES_OP_CLOSE, 0,
> > > >    			cachefiles_ondemand_init_close_req, NULL);
> > > > +
> > > > +	if (!object->ondemand->ondemand_id)
> > > > +		return;
> > > > +
> > > > +	/* Flush all requests for the object that is being dropped.
> > > > */
> > > I wouldn't call this a "Flush". In the context of writeback, that
> > > usually means that we're writing out pages now in order to do something
> > > else. In this case, it looks like you're more canceling these requests
> > > since you're marking them with an error and declaring them complete.
> > Makes sense, I'll update 'flush' to 'cancel' in the comment and subject.
> >
> > I am not a native speaker of English, so some of the expressions may
> > not be accurate, thank you for correcting me.
> Can you please resend all patch series that we're supposed to take for
> this cycle, please?
Sure, I'm organising to combine the two patch series today and
send it out as v3.

--
With Best Regards,
Baokun Li