| Message ID | 20211220085649.8196-4-songmuchun@bytedance.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Optimize list lru memory consumption | expand |
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@bytedance.com> > --- > 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. > + > --- Reviewed-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com> Thanks!
On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 2:55 AM Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com> 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@bytedance.com> > > --- > > 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@fb.com> Thanks.
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. + --- **mandatory** diff --git a/fs/inode.c b/fs/inode.c index 6b80a51129d5..dcb1e6cad201 100644 --- a/fs/inode.c +++ b/fs/inode.c @@ -234,7 +234,7 @@ static struct inode *alloc_inode(struct super_block *sb) if (ops->alloc_inode) inode = ops->alloc_inode(sb); else - inode = kmem_cache_alloc(inode_cachep, GFP_KERNEL); + inode = alloc_inode_sb(sb, inode_cachep, GFP_KERNEL); if (!inode) return NULL; diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h index bbf812ce89a8..4592f00ec5e7 100644 --- a/include/linux/fs.h +++ b/include/linux/fs.h @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ #include <linux/stddef.h> #include <linux/mount.h> #include <linux/cred.h> +#include <linux/slab.h> #include <asm/byteorder.h> #include <uapi/linux/fs.h> @@ -3178,6 +3179,16 @@ extern void free_inode_nonrcu(struct inode *inode); extern int should_remove_suid(struct dentry *); extern int file_remove_privs(struct file *); +/* + * This must be used for allocating filesystems specific inodes to set + * up the inode reclaim context correctly. + */ +static inline void * +alloc_inode_sb(struct super_block *sb, struct kmem_cache *cache, gfp_t gfp) +{ + return kmem_cache_alloc_lru(cache, &sb->s_inode_lru, gfp); +} + extern void __insert_inode_hash(struct inode *, unsigned long hashval); static inline void insert_inode_hash(struct inode *inode) {
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@bytedance.com> --- Documentation/filesystems/porting.rst | 5 +++++ fs/inode.c | 2 +- include/linux/fs.h | 11 +++++++++++ 3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)