lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Nov]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH 2/3] ocfs2: add ocfs2_overwrite_io function
Hi Alex,


>>>
> Hi Gang,
>
> On 2017/11/28 15:38, Gang He wrote:
>> Hi Alex,
>>
>>
>>>>>
>>> Hi Gang,
>>>
>>> On 2017/11/28 13:33, Gang He wrote:
>>>> Hello Alex,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Gang,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2017/11/27 17:46, Gang He wrote:
>>>>>> Add ocfs2_overwrite_io function, which is used to judge if
>>>>>> overwrite allocated blocks, otherwise, the write will bring extra
>>>>>> block allocation overhead.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Gang He <ghe@suse.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> fs/ocfs2/extent_map.c | 67
>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>> fs/ocfs2/extent_map.h | 3 +++
>>>>>> 2 files changed, 70 insertions(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/extent_map.c b/fs/ocfs2/extent_map.c
>>>>>> index e4719e0..98bf325 100644
>>>>>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/extent_map.c
>>>>>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/extent_map.c
>>>>>> @@ -832,6 +832,73 @@ int ocfs2_fiemap(struct inode *inode, struct
>>>>> fiemap_extent_info *fieinfo,
>>>>>> return ret;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +/* Is IO overwriting allocated blocks? */
>>>>>> +int ocfs2_overwrite_io(struct inode *inode, u64 map_start, u64 map_len,
>>>>>> + int wait)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + int ret = 0, is_last;
>>>>>> + u32 mapping_end, cpos;
>>>>>> + struct ocfs2_super *osb = OCFS2_SB(inode->i_sb);
>>>>>> + struct buffer_head *di_bh = NULL;
>>>>>> + struct ocfs2_extent_rec rec;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (wait)
>>>>>> + ret = ocfs2_inode_lock(inode, &di_bh, 0);
>>>>>> + else
>>>>>> + ret = ocfs2_try_inode_lock(inode, &di_bh, 0);
>>>>>> + if (ret)
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (wait)
>>>>>> + down_read(&OCFS2_I(inode)->ip_alloc_sem);
>>>>>> + else {
>>>>>> + if (!down_read_trylock(&OCFS2_I(inode)->ip_alloc_sem)) {
>>>>>> + ret = -EAGAIN;
>>>>>> + goto out_unlock1;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if ((OCFS2_I(inode)->ip_dyn_features & OCFS2_INLINE_DATA_FL) &&
>>>>>> + ((map_start + map_len) <= i_size_read(inode)))
>>>>>> + goto out_unlock2;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + cpos = map_start >> osb->s_clustersize_bits;
>>>>>> + mapping_end = ocfs2_clusters_for_bytes(inode->i_sb,
>>>>>> + map_start + map_len);
>>>>>> + is_last = 0;
>>>>>> + while (cpos < mapping_end && !is_last) {
>>>>>> + ret = ocfs2_get_clusters_nocache(inode, di_bh, cpos,
>>>>>> + NULL, &rec, &is_last);
>>>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>>>> + mlog_errno(ret);
>>>>>> + goto out_unlock2;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (rec.e_blkno == 0ULL)
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>> I think here the blocks is not overwrite, because the hold is found and the
>>>>> blocks
>>>>> should be allocated.
>>>> If the rec.e_blkno == NULL, this means there is a hole.
>>>> The file hole means that these blocks are not allocated, it does not like
>>> unwritten block.
>>>> The unwritten blocks means that these blocks are allocated, but still have
>>> not been unwritten.
>>>>
>>> If we break the loop when we find the hold, out of this function we will
>>> allocate the blocks in
>>> ocfs2_file_write_iter()->..->ocfs2_direct_IO->__blockdev_direct_IO->..->ocfs2_dio_wr_g
>>> et_block()
>>> ->ocfs2_write_begin_nolock. Does this violate the semantics of 'IOCB_NOWAIT';
>> Yes, then we need to check if this is a overwrite before doing direct-io.
>>
>
> I mean here we should return 0 instead of break and we should immediately
> return -EAGAIN
> to upper apps, otherwise, some block allocation will be happen, which
> violates the
> semantics of 'IOCB_NOWAIT'.
Before we do a direct-io, I need to check if this is a overwrite allocated blocks IO.
If not, we will return -EAGAIN in 'IOCB_NOWAIT' mode. this should not trigger any block allocation.
I am not sure if we understand your concern totally.

Thanks
Gang

>
> Thanks,
> Alex
>
>>>
>>> BTW, should we consider the down_write() and ocfs2_inode_lock() in
>>> ocfs2_dio_wr_get_block() when
>>> the flag 'IOCB_NOWAIT' is set;
>> I think that we should not consider that layer lock, otherwise, the code
> change will become more and more complex and big.
>> I also refer to ext4 file system code change for this
> feature(728fbc0e10b7f3ce2ee043b32e3453fd5201c055), they did not do any change
> in that layer.
>>
>
> OK.
>
>> Thanks
>> Gang
>>
>>>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (rec.e_flags & OCFS2_EXT_REFCOUNTED)
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + cpos = le32_to_cpu(rec.e_cpos) +
>>>>>> + le16_to_cpu(rec.e_leaf_clusters);
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (cpos < mapping_end)
>>>>>> + ret = 1;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +out_unlock2:
>>>>>
>>>>> I think the 'out_up_read' is more readable than the 'out_unlock2' .
>>>> Ok, I will use more readable tag here.
>>>>>
>>>>>> + brelse(di_bh);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + up_read(&OCFS2_I(inode)->ip_alloc_sem);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +out_unlock1:
>>>>>
>>>>> We should release buffer head here.
>>>>>
>>>>>> + ocfs2_inode_unlock(inode, 0);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +out:
>>>>>> + return (ret ? 0 : 1);
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> int ocfs2_seek_data_hole_offset(struct file *file, loff_t *offset, int
>>>>> whence)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> struct inode *inode = file->f_mapping->host;
>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/extent_map.h b/fs/ocfs2/extent_map.h
>>>>>> index 67ea57d..fd9e86a 100644
>>>>>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/extent_map.h
>>>>>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/extent_map.h
>>>>>> @@ -53,6 +53,9 @@ int ocfs2_extent_map_get_blocks(struct inode *inode, u64
>>>>> v_blkno, u64 *p_blkno,
>>>>>> int ocfs2_fiemap(struct inode *inode, struct fiemap_extent_info *fieinfo,
>>>>>> u64 map_start, u64 map_len);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +int ocfs2_overwrite_io(struct inode *inode, u64 map_start, u64 map_len,
>>>>>> + int wait);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> int ocfs2_seek_data_hole_offset(struct file *file, loff_t *offset, int
>>>>> origin);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> int ocfs2_xattr_get_clusters(struct inode *inode, u32 v_cluster,
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>
>> .
>>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-11-28 09:33    [W:0.907 / U:4.180 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site