From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Tal Zussman <tz2294@columbia.edu>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>,
Carlos Maiolino <cem@kernel.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v4 2/3] iomap: use BIO_COMPLETE_IN_TASK for dropbehind writeback
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2026 21:01:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ada0KnRjpYnY_QYh@casper.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9631d652-fd3a-45ac-b8a3-b632b26f6fa5@columbia.edu>
On Wed, Apr 08, 2026 at 03:44:37PM -0400, Tal Zussman wrote:
> On 3/25/26 4:21 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 25, 2026 at 02:43:01PM -0400, Tal Zussman wrote:
> >> Set BIO_COMPLETE_IN_TASK on iomap writeback bios when
> >> IOMAP_IOEND_DONTCACHE is set. This ensures that bi_end_io runs in task
> >> context, where folio_end_dropbehind() can safely invalidate folios.
> >>
> >> With the bio layer now handling task-context deferral generically, XFS
> >> no longer needs to route DONTCACHE ioends through its completion
> >> workqueue for page cache invalidation. Remove the DONTCACHE check from
> >> xfs_ioend_needs_wq_completion().
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Tal Zussman <tz2294@columbia.edu>
> >> ---
> >> fs/iomap/ioend.c | 2 ++
> >> fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c | 4 ----
> >> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/fs/iomap/ioend.c b/fs/iomap/ioend.c
> >> index e4d57cb969f1..6b8375d11cc0 100644
> >> --- a/fs/iomap/ioend.c
> >> +++ b/fs/iomap/ioend.c
> >> @@ -113,6 +113,8 @@ static struct iomap_ioend *iomap_alloc_ioend(struct iomap_writepage_ctx *wpc,
> >> GFP_NOFS, &iomap_ioend_bioset);
> >> bio->bi_iter.bi_sector = iomap_sector(&wpc->iomap, pos);
> >> bio->bi_write_hint = wpc->inode->i_write_hint;
> >> + if (ioend_flags & IOMAP_IOEND_DONTCACHE)
> >> + bio_set_flag(bio, BIO_COMPLETE_IN_TASK);
> >> wbc_init_bio(wpc->wbc, bio);
> >> wpc->nr_folios = 0;
> >> return iomap_init_ioend(wpc->inode, bio, pos, ioend_flags);
> >
> > Can't we delete IOMAP_IOEND_DONTCACHE, and just do:
> >
> > if (folio_test_dropbehind(folio))
> > bio_set_flag(&ioend->io_bio, BIO_COMPLETE_IN_TASK);
> >
> > It'd need to move down a few lines in iomap_add_to_ioend() to after
> > bio_add_folio() succeeds.
> >
>
> Actually, looking into it more, IOMAP_IOEND_DONTCACHE is used as part of
> IOMAP_IOEND_NOMERGE_FLAGS. I think deleting it while maintaining the
> no-merge behavior would be uglier than leaving it in.
But why was it added to NOMERGE in the first place? I don't think it's
harmful to merge writeback I/Os which are COMPLETE_IN_TASK and I/Os
which are not, as long as the final I/O is completed in a task.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-08 20:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-25 18:42 [PATCH RFC v4 0/3] block: enable RWF_DONTCACHE for block devices Tal Zussman
2026-03-25 18:43 ` [PATCH RFC v4 1/3] block: add BIO_COMPLETE_IN_TASK for task-context completion Tal Zussman
2026-03-25 19:54 ` Matthew Wilcox
2026-03-25 20:14 ` Jens Axboe
2026-04-08 18:48 ` Tal Zussman
2026-04-08 19:51 ` Jens Axboe
2026-04-08 22:51 ` Tal Zussman
2026-03-25 20:26 ` Dave Chinner
2026-03-25 20:39 ` Matthew Wilcox
2026-03-26 2:44 ` Dave Chinner
2026-04-08 18:50 ` Tal Zussman
2026-03-25 21:03 ` Bart Van Assche
2026-03-26 3:18 ` Dave Chinner
2026-03-27 6:01 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-04-08 19:35 ` Tal Zussman
2026-03-25 18:43 ` [PATCH RFC v4 2/3] iomap: use BIO_COMPLETE_IN_TASK for dropbehind writeback Tal Zussman
2026-03-25 20:21 ` Matthew Wilcox
2026-03-27 6:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-04-08 19:36 ` Tal Zussman
2026-04-08 19:44 ` Tal Zussman
2026-04-08 20:01 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2026-04-08 20:10 ` Tal Zussman
2026-03-25 20:34 ` Dave Chinner
2026-03-27 6:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-03-27 6:24 ` Gao Xiang
2026-03-27 6:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-03-27 6:45 ` Gao Xiang
2026-03-25 18:43 ` [PATCH RFC v4 3/3] block: enable RWF_DONTCACHE for block devices Tal Zussman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ada0KnRjpYnY_QYh@casper.infradead.org \
--to=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=cem@kernel.org \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tz2294@columbia.edu \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox