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: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Reviewed-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
else if (mp->m_logdev_targp != 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