Commit ae29e422 authored by Christoph Hellwig's avatar Christoph Hellwig Committed by Darrick J. Wong

xfs: reduce ilock acquisitions in xfs_file_fsync

If the inode is not pinned by the time fsync is called we don't need the
ilock to protect against concurrent clearing of ili_fsync_fields as the
inode won't need a log flush or clearing of these fields.  Not taking
the iolock allows for full concurrency of fsync and thus O_DSYNC
completions with io_uring/aio write submissions.
Signed-off-by: default avatarChristoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Reviewed-by: default avatarDarrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDarrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: default avatarDave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
parent f22c7f87
...@@ -200,7 +200,14 @@ xfs_file_fsync( ...@@ -200,7 +200,14 @@ xfs_file_fsync(
else if (mp->m_logdev_targp != mp->m_ddev_targp) else if (mp->m_logdev_targp != mp->m_ddev_targp)
xfs_blkdev_issue_flush(mp->m_ddev_targp); xfs_blkdev_issue_flush(mp->m_ddev_targp);
error = xfs_fsync_flush_log(ip, datasync, &log_flushed); /*
* Any inode that has dirty modifications in the log is pinned. The
* racy check here for a pinned inode while not catch modifications
* that happen concurrently to the fsync call, but fsync semantics
* only require to sync previously completed I/O.
*/
if (xfs_ipincount(ip))
error = xfs_fsync_flush_log(ip, datasync, &log_flushed);
/* /*
* If we only have a single device, and the log force about was * If we only have a single device, and the log force about was
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment