Re: [PATCH] xfs: restore nofs context unconditionally in xfs_trans_roll
From: Matthew Wilcox
Date: Tue Jul 14 2026 - 14:17:51 EST
On Tue, Jul 14, 2026 at 10:55:28AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> [add linux-mm since we're talking about memalloc_nofs_save]
Thanks!
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2026 at 10:15:53AM +0800, Zhou, Yun wrote:
> > On 7/14/26 07:04, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2026 at 06:28:38AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2026 at 06:06:38PM +0800, Zhou, Yun wrote:
> > > > > On 7/13/26 17:09, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > > > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2026 at 11:55:05AM +0800, Yun Zhou wrote:
> > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c
> > > > > > > index 7bfbd9f6f0df..1b36cf12d4e3 100644
> > > > > > > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c
> > > > > > > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c
> > > > > > > @@ -1029,6 +1029,15 @@ xfs_trans_roll(
> > > > > > > * duplicate transaction that gets returned.
> > > > > > > */
> > > > > > > error = __xfs_trans_commit(tp, true);
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + tp = *tpp;
> > > > > > > + /*
> > > > > > > + * __xfs_trans_commit cleared the NOFS flag by calling into
> > > > > > > + * xfs_trans_free. Set it again here before doing memory
> > > > > > > + * allocations.
> > > > > > > + */
> > > > > > > + xfs_trans_set_context(tp);
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The tp assignment above now returns the incorrect transaction when
> > > > > > __xfs_trans_commit fails, so you can't do this.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Otherwise yes, this call should move up. I don't really see how
> > > > > > it fixes the syzbot report, though.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you very much for your reply. The tp here is a local variable only
> > > > > used for convenience within the function. The caller always gets the new
> > > > > transaction through *tpp, which was set by xfs_trans_dup() before the commit
> > > > > call. Moving tp = *tpp before the error check doesn't change what the caller
> > > > > sees - *tpp still points to the new (dup'd) transaction regardless.
> > > >
> > > > Ah, right. Tis should be fine:
> > > >
> > > > Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Why not move tp_pflags to the new transaction in xfs_trans_dup like we
> > > do for the deferred item list:
> > >
> > > /* move deferred ops over to the new tp */
> > > xfs_defer_move(ntp, tp);
> > >
> > > ntp->t_pflags = tp->t_pflags;
> > > tp->t_pflags = 0;
> >
> > That's what the old xfs_trans_switch_context() did before a1ca658d649a
> > removed it. The problem is that setting tp->t_pflags = 0 means
> > xfs_trans_free() calls memalloc_nofs_restore(0), which relies on that being
> > a no-op — an mm implementation detail. A fresh memalloc_nofs_save() on the
> > new tp keeps the save/restore pairing correct unconditionally.
>
> So add a new helper.
>
> /**
> * memalloc_flags_take - move an implicit __GFP_MEMALLOC scope from one
> * tracking structure to another.
> */
> static inline unsigned int
> memalloc_flags_take(unsigned int *old_flags)
> {
> unsigned int ret = *old_flags;
>
> *old_flags = 0;
> return ret;
> }
>
> and then:
>
> /* move deferred ops over to the new tp */
> xfs_defer_move(ntp, tp);
>
> ntp->t_pflags = memalloc_flags_take(&tp->t_pflags);
I might stick with the 'move' wording? ie memalloc_flags_move().
And I think you should bury the call to memalloc_flags_move() inside
xfs_defer_move(). I don't think there's a case where you'd want to move
from one transaction to another without preserving the nofs state, is
there? Bit hard to tell since there's only one caller of xfs_defer_move()
in the XFS code base.