[lkml]   [2017]   [Dec]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
Subject(Lack of) i_version handling in udf

Re: [PATCH v4 00/19] fs: rework and optimize i_version handling in filesystems

On 12/22/2017 06:05 AM, Jeff Layton wrote:

> The inode->i_version field is supposed to be a value that changes
> whenever there is any data or metadata change to the inode. Some
> filesystems use it internally to detect directory changes during
> readdir. knfsd will use it if the filesystem has MS_I_VERSION set. IMA
> will also use it to optimize away some remeasurement if it's available.
> NFS and AFS just use it to store an opaque change attribute from the
> server.
> Only btrfs, ext4, and xfs increment it for data changes. Because of
> this, these filesystems must log the inode to disk whenever the
> i_version counter changes. That has a non-zero performance impact,
> especially on write-heavy workloads, because we end up dirtying the
> inode metadata on every write, not just when the times change.
> It turns out though that none of these users of i_version require that
> it change on every change to the file. The only real requirement is that
> it be different if something changed since the last time we queried for
> it.
> If we keep track of when something queries the value, we can avoid
> bumping the counter and an on-disk update when nothing else has changed
> if no one has queried it since it was last incremented.

This happened to cross my radar, which made me it a problem
that the UDF driver does not have any references to i_version at all?
I suppose R/W UDF is a small subset of the normal use cases, but the driver
does try to support it.

Steven J. Magnani "I claim this network for MARS! Earthling, return my space modulator!"

#include <standard.disclaimer>

 \ /
  Last update: 2017-12-22 17:09    [W:0.173 / U:1.420 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site